ArticleJournal of medical screening2016
Availability of Advanced Breast Imaging at Screening Facilities Serving Vulnerable Populations.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced Versus Invasive Breast Cancer Risk in a Screening Population: Implications for Risk-based Prevention and Screening Strategies.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- "It's Not Just Cost": Barriers to Mammography Screening Access Among Low-income Women in the United States-A Scoping Review.Journal of cancer prevention · 2026Review
- Disparities in Standard-of-Care, Advanced, and Same-Day Diagnostic Services among Patients with Abnormal Screening Mammography.Radiology · 2025Article
- Social determinants of health and health inequities in breast cancer screening: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Imaging Surveillance Options for Individuals With a Personal History of Breast Cancer:AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2022Review
- Addressing Disparities Related to Access of Multimodality Breast Imaging Services Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Academic radiology · 2022Review
- Identifying key barriers to effective breast cancer control in rural settings.Preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Prioritizing breast imaging services during the COVID pandemic: A survey of breast imaging facilities within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.Preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Availability Versus Utilization of Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening Post Passage of Breast Density Legislation.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2021Article
- Addressing Potential Health Disparities in the Adoption of Advanced Breast Imaging Technologies.Academic radiology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAmong vulnerable women, unequal access to advanced breast imaging modalities beyond screening mammography may lead to delays in cancer diagnosis and unfavourable outcomes. We aimed to compare on-site availability of advanced breast imaging services (ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], and image-guided biopsy) between imaging facilities serving vulnerable patient populations and those serving non-vulnerable populations.
setting73 imaging facilities across five Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium regional registries in the United States during 2011 and 2012.
methodsWe examined facility and patient characteristics across a large, national sample of imaging facilities and patients served. We characterized facilities as serving vulnerable populations based on the proportion of mammograms performed on women with lower educational attainment, lower median income, racial/ethnic minority status, and rural residence.We performed multivariable logistic regression to determine relative risks of on-site availability of advanced imaging at facilities serving vulnerable women versus facilities serving non-vulnerable women.
resultsFacilities serving vulnerable populations were as likely (Relative risk [RR] for MRI = 0.71, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.42, 1.19; RR for MRI-guided biopsy = 1.07 [0.61, 1.90]; RR for stereotactic biopsy = 1.18 [0.75, 1.85]) or more likely (RR for ultrasound = 1.38 [95% CI 1.09, 1.74]; RR for ultrasound-guided biopsy = 1.67 [1.30, 2.14]) to offer advanced breast imaging services as those serving non-vulnerable populations.
conclusionsAdvanced breast imaging services are physically available on-site for vulnerable women in the United States, but it is unknown whether factors such as insurance coverage or out-of-pocket costs might limit their use.
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.