ArticleInternational journal of public health2015
Breast cancer screening in England and the United States: a comparison of provision and utilisation.
Article in International journal of public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Surveillance recommendations for DICER1 pathogenic variant carriers: a report from the SIOPE Host Genome Working Group and CanGene-CanVar Clinical Guideline Working Group.Familial cancer · 2021Guideline
- Cost-effectiveness of organised versus opportunistic mammography breast cancer screening in low-resourced country.BMJ open · 2026Article
- A scoping review of programme specific mammographic breast density related guidelines and practices within breast screening programmes.European journal of radiology open · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a population-based breast cancer screening in North China.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Quality control system for mammographic breast positioning using deep learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A nationwide pilot study on breast cancer screening in Peru.Ecancermedicalscience · 2023Article
- Rational Approach to Finding Genes Encoding Molecular Biomarkers: Focus on Breast Cancer.Genes · 2022Article
- Global Increase in Breast Cancer Incidence: Risk Factors and Preventive Measures.BioMed research international · 2022Review
- Women's considerations and experiences for breast cancer screening and surveillance during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States: A focus group study.Preventive medicine · 2021Review
- Comparing Clinicopathologic Features and Surgical Treatment of Premenopausal Breast Cancer across Italy and China: Report from a Medical Exchange Program.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Association between Screening Mammography Recall Rate and Interval Cancers in the UK Breast Cancer Service Screening Program: A Cohort Study.Radiology · 2018Article
- Benefits and Risks of Mammography Screening in Women Ages 40 to 49 Years.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesComparing breast cancer screening across countries within the context of some of the benefits and harms offers the opportunity to improve effectiveness through mutual learning.
methodsThis paper describes the provision of breast cancer screening in England and the United States. The various recommendations for accessing breast cancer screening in the two countries are set out and the organisation of services including quality assurance, incentives and performance mechanisms considered.
resultsIn the United States, younger women are routinely screened; they are less likely to benefit and more likely to be harmed. The utilisation of breast cancer screening amongst eligible women is broadly comparable in the two countries. However, there are differences in technical performance; the reasons for these including radiological reading procedures and cultural factors are explored.
conclusionsDespite a well-functioning screening programme, breast cancer mortality and survival in England are poor relative to other countries. Emphasis for American improvement should be on reducing false-positive recall rates, while the English NHS could supplement existing efforts to understand and improve comparatively poor survival and mortality.
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.