ArticleBMJ open2014
A cross-sectional study on informed choice in the mammography screening programme in Germany (InEMa): a study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does a decision aid improve informed choice in mammography screening? Results from a randomised controlled trial.PloS one · 2017Trial
- Informed Choice in the German Mammography Screening Program by Education and Migrant Status: Survey among First-Time Invitees.PloS one · 2015Trial
- Breast cancer in immigrant women in Europe and Italy: epidemiology, disparities, and pathways to equity.Oncology reviews · 2026Review
- Breast cancer incidence and mammography screening among resettlers in Germany.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Uptake of Gynecological Cancer Screening and Performance of Breast Self-Examination Among 50-Year-Old Migrant and Non-migrant Women in Germany: Results of a Cross-Sectional Study (InEMa).Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2019Article
- Development of the Informed Choice in Mammography Screening Questionnaire (IMQ): factor structure, reliability, and validity.BMC psychology · 2019Article
- Do Women With High eHealth Literacy Profit More From a Decision Aid on Mammography Screening? Testing the Moderation Effect of the eHEALS in a Randomized Controlled Trial.Frontiers in public health · 2019Article
- Does a decision aid improve informed choice in mammography screening? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.BMC women's health · 2015Article
- Comparing adaptive and fixed bandwidth-based kernel density estimates in spatial cancer epidemiology.International journal of health geographics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBreast cancer is the most prevalent cancer among women. In Germany, women are invited to a population-based mammography screening programme for the first time at the age of 50. Since it is still discussed whether the benefits of mammography screening outweigh its harms, the concept of informed choice has gained importance. The objective of this cross-sectional study is to assess the proportion of informed choices in the mammography screening programme. A special focus is on the examination of the impact of Turkish migration background and educational level on informed choices. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The proportion of informed choices is evaluated in a cross-sectional study with 3-month follow-up for behavioural implementation of the screening intention. A randomly selected sample of 17,000 women aged 50 years living in Westphalia-Lippe, a region in the Federal State of North-Rhine Westphalia, is invited to participate in this study. To reach adequate numbers of Turkish women, all possibly Turkish women in the sample are identified through a name algorithm and contacted. The sample is drawn from women registered in the study area for which the registration offices consented to supply data for the study (88% of all towns/cities in the study region). Women identified through the Turkish name algorithm received all materials in German and Turkish. The primary outcome is informed choice. Data are collected on informed choice components (knowledge, attitude, decision/implementation) as well as on its possible determinants (eg, health behaviour, perceived behavioural control, subjective norms, invitation status, migration background and other demographic variables). Data are collected before the screening appointment and at 3 months follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the ethical committee of the Medical Faculty of Muenster University. Results will be published in a relevant scientific journal and communicated to respondents and relevant institutions.
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.