Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29903796›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2018

Should women aged 70-74 be invited to participate in screening mammography? A report on two Australian community juries.

Chris Degeling, Alexandra Barratt, Sanchia Aranda, Robin Bell, Jenny Doust, Nehmat Houssami, Jolyn Hersch, Ruben Sakowsky, Vikki Entwistle, Stacy M Carter

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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 · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Fictitious cases as a methodology to discuss sensitive health topics in focus groups.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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 · 2023
    Article
  17. 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 · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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 · 2021
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Chris DegelingResearch for Social Change, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4279-3443
Alexandra BarrattWiser Healthcare, Sydney, Australia.
Sanchia ArandaThe Cancer Council Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Robin BellDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Jenny DoustCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Nehmat HoussamiWiser Healthcare, Sydney, Australia.
Jolyn HerschWiser Healthcare, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5225-6639
Ruben SakowskyHealth Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Vikki EntwistleHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Stacy M CarterResearch for Social Change, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2617-8694

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HERU1
6 · The paper itself

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

Health PolicyMammographyPublic OpinionAgedBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGovernment ProgramsHumansNew South WalesRisk Assessmentdeliberative methodshealth policymammography screeningoverdiagnosispublic health

Identifiers

PMID29903796
PMCPMC6009633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.