Trial reportBMJ open2018
Should women aged 70-74 be invited to participate in screening mammography? A report on two Australian community juries.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient-Reported Factors Associated With Older Adults' Cancer Screening Decision-making: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Public (un)willingness to trade-off benefits and harms in decisions about cancer screening: A discrete choice experiment.Journal of medical screening · 2026Article
- Why Most Australians Consider It Valuable to Find Harmless Abnormalities with Diagnostic Tests: A Mixed-Methods Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- Public funding for mitochondrial donation: An Australian public deliberation.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Article
- How should artificial intelligence be used in breast screening? Women's reasoning about workflow options.PloS one · 2025Article
- How Do Australians Manage Diagnostic Testing Risks? Focus Groups Linked to a Model of Behaviour Change.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- General practitioners' views and experiences of communicating with older people about cancer screening: a qualitative study.Family practice · 2024Article
- Impact of different age ranges on the benefits and harms of the breast cancer screening programme by the EU-TOPIA tool.European journal of public health · 2024Article
- Strategies for engaging older adults and informal caregivers in health policy development: A scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- IMPAACT: IMproving the PArticipAtion of older people in policy decision-making on common health CondiTions - a study protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Fictitious cases as a methodology to discuss sensitive health topics in focus groups.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2023Article
- Personalised colorectal cancer screening strategies: Information needs of the target population.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Article
- Implementation of risk stratification within bowel cancer screening: a community jury study exploring public acceptability and communication needs.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Women's experiences of age-related discontinuation from mammography screening: A qualitative interview study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- A community jury study exploring the public acceptability of using risk stratification to determine eligibility for cancer screening.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- "Thought provoking", "interactive", and "more like a peer talk": Testing the deliberative interview style in Germany.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2021Article
- Acceptability of risk-stratified population screening across cancer types: Qualitative interviews with the Australian public.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo elicit informed views from Australian women aged 70-74 regarding the acceptability of ceasing to invite women their age to participate in government-funded mammography screening (BreastScreen).
designTwo community juries held in 2017.
settingGreater Sydney, a metropolis of 4.5 million people in New South Wales, Australia.
participants34 women aged 70-74 with no personal history of breast cancer, recruited by random digit dialling and previously randomly recruited list-based samples. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Jury verdict and rationale in response to structured questions. We transcribed audio-recorded jury proceedings and identified central reasons for the jury's decision.
resultsThe women's average age was 71.5 years. Participants were of diverse sociocultural backgrounds, with the sample designed to include women of lower levels of educational attainment. Both juries concluded by majority verdict (16-2 and 10-6) that BreastScreen should continue to send invitations and promote screening to their age group. Reasons given for the majority position include: (1) sending the invitations shows that society still cares about older women, empowers them to access preventive health services and recognises increasing and varied life expectancy; (2) screening provides women with information that enables choice and (3) if experts cannot agree, the conservative approach is to maintain the status quo until the evidence is clear. Reasons for the minority position were the potential for harms through overdiagnosis and misallocation of scarce health resources.
conclusionsPreventive programmes such as mammography screening are likely to have significant symbolic value once they are socially embedded. Arguments for programme de-implementation emphasising declining benefit because of limited life expectancy and the risks of overdiagnosis seem unlikely to resonate with healthy older women. In situations where there is no consensus among experts on the value of established screening programmes, people may strongly prefer receiving information about their health and having the opportunity make their own choices.
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.