ArticleWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
Perspectives on mammography after receipt of secondary screening owing to a false positive.
Article in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How do women experience a false-positive test result from breast screening? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.British journal of cancer · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Guideline
- Characteristics of breast cancers detected by screening mammography in Taiwan: a single institute's experience.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Article
- Psychological Outcomes After a False Positive Mammogram: Preliminary Evidence for Ethnic Differences Across Time.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2017Article
- An opportunity to address modifiable breast cancer risks: Mammography screening and physical activity readiness to change.Preventive medicine reports · 2017Article
- Beyond the mammography debate: a moderate perspective.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe utility of mammography screening as an efficacious tool for early detection is being contested owing to the risk of potential harms, including psychological distress and exposure to unnecessary procedures associated with false-positive (FPs) results and overdiagnosis. However, there is little research regarding women's experiences, values, or preferences for participating in mammography programs. Our aim was to explore women's actual experiences of a FP mammography screen and their perceptions of the value, risks and benefits given their recent experience.
methodsWe conducted semistructured interviews with 40 women who experienced a recent FP mammogram. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A directed content analysis was used to identify and explore primary themes. Knowledge of breast cancer risk was also assessed.
findingsReceiving a FP mammography screen generated significant worry among 60% (n=24) of women. Yet 70% maintained that mammography screening was necessary despite the worry incurred. Women also described the experience as stimulating greater interest in additional cancer prevention activities (32.5%; n=13) and one-third discussed needing more information about the risks and benefits of mammography screening. Less than one-quarter of women (22.5%; n=9) correctly identified a women's lifetime risk of developing breast cancer; 20% (n=8) overestimated, and 57.5% (n=23) underestimated this risk.
conclusionWomen reported needing more information about the risks and benefits of mammography screening, but also considered FP results an acceptable risk. Further, our results suggest that breast cancer screening programs may provide a unique opportunity to deliver additional breast cancer prevention interventions.
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.