Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24623009›Full record

ArticleDer Radiologe2014

[Mammography screening in Germany. Current results and future challenges].

K Bock, S Heywang-Köbrunner, L Regitz-Jedermann, G Hecht, V Kääb-Sanyal

Registry-linked trialAbstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Radiologe, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04030728 (A Randomized, Controlled Study of Standardized Patient Coaching Versus Patient Management According to Local Practice for Patients With Hormone Receptor Positive HER2 Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer Treated With Abemaciclib), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04030728 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized, Controlled Study of Standardized Patient Coaching Versus Patient Management According to Local Practice for Patients With Hormone Receptor Positive HER2 Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer Treated With Abemaciclib

TypeobservationalSponsorOnco Medical Consult GmbHRan2020 to 2021Enrolled212ConditionsMetastatic Breast Cancer, Advanced Breast Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

K BockReferenzzentrum Mammographie Südwest/Marburg, Bahnhofstr. 7, 35037, Marburg, Deutschland, bock@referenzzentrum-suedwest.de.
S Heywang-Köbrunner
L Regitz-Jedermann
G Hecht
V Kääb-Sanyal

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of mammography screening is based on the expectation that early diagnosis in a preclinical tumor stage enables less invasive treatment with a better prognosis than detection in advanced tumor stages. Mammography screening was implemented in European countries after results from large randomized controlled trials showed that regular screening led to a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality by 25-30 %. Recently, a major review of breast cancer screening services in Europe concluded that the benefits of screening clearly outweighed the disadvantages. In comparison to other European screening nations the German mammography screening program is relatively new. The challenge to prove the effectiveness by reduction in mortality still has to be solved. Continuous evaluation and optimization concerning the quality of structure, processes and results already confirm the high quality of the nationwide German screening services.

Indexed as

ForecastingBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerEuropeFemaleGermanyHumansIncidenceMammographyRisk FactorsSurvival RateWomen's Health

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.