ArticleRadiology2018
Association between Screening Mammography Recall Rate and Interval Cancers in the UK Breast Cancer Service Screening Program: A Cohort Study.
Article in Radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Test performance metrics for breast, cervical, colon, and lung cancer screening: a systematic review.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of contrast-enhanced mammography compared to conventional imaging in the work-up after screening (RACER trial).European radiology · 2026Trial
- Article
- Biennial Mammography Performance in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program From 2009 to 2020.Korean journal of radiology · 2025Article
- The influence of breast screening on breast cancer incidence in England: observational study based on cancer registries and bulletins of the NHS Breast Screening Programme.European journal of public health · 2024Observational
- Optimising the diagnostic accuracy of First post-contrAst SubtracTed breast MRI (FAST MRI) through interpretation-training: a multicentre e-learning study, mapping the learning curve of NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) mammogram readers using an enriched dataset.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- The cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening in the UK.British journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Evaluation of breast cancer screening indicators in the female population using the National Health System, Brazil, 2018-2019: a descriptive study.Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil · 2023Article
- A case-control study to evaluate the impact of the breast screening programme on breast cancer incidence in England.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Optimum screening mammography reading volumes: evidence from the NHS Breast Screening Programme.European radiology · 2021Article
- Association between radiologists' and facilities' characteristics and mammography screening detection of ductal carcinoma in situ.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program after a false-positive result in the Local Health Authority of Bologna (Italy).Scientific reports · 2021Article
- An analysis of screen-detected invasive cancers by grade in the English breast cancer screening programme: are we failing to detect sufficient small grade 3 cancers?European radiology · 2021Observational
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Screening of Breast Cancer.Radiologic clinics of North America · 2021Review
- A review of the PERFORMS scheme in breast screening.The British journal of radiology · 2020Review
- An analysis of 11.3 million screening tests examining the association between recall and cancer detection rates in the English NHS breast cancer screening programme.European radiology · 2019Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To determine whether low levels of recall lead to increased interval cancers and the magnitude of this effect. Materials and Methods The authors retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data from the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme during a 36-month period (April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2008), with 3-year follow-up in women aged 50-70 years. Data on recall, cancers detected at screening, and interval cancers were available for each of the 84 breast screening units and for each year (n = 252). The association between interval cancers and recalls was modeled by using Poisson regression on aggregated data and according to age (5-year intervals) and screening type (prevalent vs incident). Results The authors analyzed 5 126 689 screening episodes, demonstrating an average recall to assessment rate (RAR) of 4.56% (range, 1.64%-8.42%; standard deviation, 1.15%), cancer detection rate of 8.1 per 1000 women screened, and interval cancer rate (ICR) of 3.1 per 1000 women screened. Overall, a significant negative association was found between RAR and ICR (Poisson regression coefficient: -0.039 [95% confidence interval: -0.062, -0.017]; P = .001), with approximately one fewer interval cancer for every additional 80-84 recalls. Subgroup analysis revealed similar negative correlations in women aged 50-54 years (P = .002), 60-64 years (P = .01), and 65-69 years (P = .008) as well as in incident screens (P = .001) and prevalent screens (P = .04). No significant relationship was found in women aged 55-59 years (P = .46). Conclusion There was a statistically significant negative correlation between RAR and ICR, which suggests the merit of a minimum threshold for RAR.
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.