Trial reportCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2014
Cost-effectiveness of non-invasive assessment in the Dutch breast cancer screening program versus usual care: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Economic Evaluations of Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Systematic Review Focusing on Methodology and Quality Assessment.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Patient preferences for breast cancer screening: a systematic review update to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Literature Review of Health Utility Values in Breast Cancer.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Pooled it
- Impact of the second reader on screening outcome at blinded double reading of digital screening mammograms.British journal of cancer · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIncreased recall rates in the Dutch breast cancer screening program call for a new assessment strategy aiming to reduce unnecessary costs and anxiety. Diagnostic work-up (usual care) includes multidisciplinary hospital assessment and is similar for all recalled women, regardless of the radiologist's suspicion of breast cancer. This is similar in many Canadian settings. We developed a novel assessment strategy that offers women with a low suspicion of breast cancer a quick and non-invasive assessment by a screening radiologist (intervention). We compared these two strategies in a cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized controlled trial: multicentre randomized controlled trial (MASS trial, Netherlands National Trial Register: NTR1480).
methodsParticipants were enrolled between August 2010 and December 2012 and were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group (allocation ratio 2:1). Fourteen assessment centres participated in the study. Questionnaires were used to record quality of life (EuroQol-5D), health care use and costs after recall.
resultsOur study comprised 366 women, of whom 288 were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 88 to the control group. The mean difference in cost was €153/CAD $226 (95% confidence interval €107-199/CAD $158-294, p<0.001). We found no significant differences in quality of life. The bootstrapped incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in the cost-effectiveness plane showed that the intervention was the efficient, cost-saving modality.
conclusionOur data show the benefits of tailoring diagnostic assessment to the screening radiologist's suspicion of breast cancer. Scenarios of implementing such a strategy in the Dutch screening or health care system are currently being discussed with various stakeholders.
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.