ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2014
Effect of implementation of the mass breast cancer screening programme in older women in the Netherlands: population based study.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Screening for breast cancer: a systematic review update to inform the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care guideline.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Prevalence of incidental breast cancer and precursor lesions in autopsy studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2017Pooled it
- Breast Cancer Screening Programmes across the WHO European Region: Differences among Countries Based on National Income Level.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017Pooled it
- Statistical analyses in Swedish randomised trials on mammography screening and in other randomised trials on cancer screening: a systematic review.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2015Pooled it
- Should women aged 70-74 be invited to participate in screening mammography? A report on two Australian community juries.BMJ open · 2018Trial
- General practitioners' views and experiences of communicating with older people about cancer screening: a qualitative study.Family practice · 2024Article
- High-value breast cancer care within resource limitations.The oncologist · 2024Review
- Prognostic Factors Associated with Breast Cancer-Specific Survival from 1995 to 2022: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 1,386,663 Cases from 30 Countries.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Women's experiences of age-related discontinuation from mammography screening: A qualitative interview study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Factors affecting 30-day postoperative complications after emergency surgery during the COVID-19 outbreak: A multicentre cohort study.International journal of surgery open · 2021Article
- Impact of the age expansion of breast screening on screening uptake and screening outcomes among older women in BreastScreen western.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2021Article
- Population-level breast screening: how to salvage the concept?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2020Article
- Redefining Criteria to Ensure Adequate Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy With Dual Tracer for Breast Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Effectiveness of and overdiagnosis from mammography screening in the Netherlands: population based study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Article
- Defining disease in the context of overdiagnosis.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2017Article
- Effect of organised mammography screening on stage-specific incidence in Norway: population study.British journal of cancer · 2016Article
- The impact of eliminating age inequalities in stage at diagnosis on breast cancer survival for older women.British journal of cancer · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the incidence of early stage and advanced stage breast cancer before and after the implementation of mass screening in women aged 70-75 years in the Netherlands in 1998.
designProspective nationwide population based study.
settingNational cancer registry, the Netherlands.
participantsPatients aged 70-75 years with a diagnosis of invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ breast cancer between 1995 and 2011 (n=25,414). Incidence rates were calculated using population data from Statistics Netherlands.
main outcome measureIncidence rates of early stage (I, II, or ductal carcinoma in situ) and advanced stage (III and IV) breast cancer before and after implementation of screening. Hypotheses were formulated before data collection.
resultsThe incidence of early stage tumours significantly increased after the extension for implementation of screening (248.7 cases per 100,000 women before screening up to 362.9 cases per 100,000 women after implementation of screening, incidence rate ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.40 to 1.52, P<0.001). However, the incidence of advanced stage breast cancers decreased to a far lesser extent (58.6 cases per 100,000 women before screening to 51.8 cases per 100,000 women after implementation of screening, incidence rate ratio 0.88, 0.81 to 0.97, P<0.001).
conclusionsThe extension of the upper age limit to 75 years has only led to a small decrease in incidence of advanced stage breast cancer, while that of early stage tumours has strongly increased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.