ArticleEuropean radiology2019
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.
Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing and validating key performance indicators for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening programs: a literature review and Delphi survey.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Finding the optimal recall rate in breast cancer screening: results from the ROCS study.European radiology · 2026Article
- Development and quality appraisal of a new English breast screening linked data set as part of the age, test threshold, and frequency of mammography screening (ATHENA-M) study.The British journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Optimum screening mammography reading volumes: evidence from the NHS Breast Screening Programme.European radiology · 2021Article
- The "Sweet Spot" Revisited: Optimal Recall Rates for Cancer Detection With 2D and 3D Digital Screening Mammography in the Metro Chicago Breast Cancer Registry.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 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
- Radiological review of prior screening mammograms of screen-detected breast cancer.European radiology · 2021Article
- Screening detects a myriad of breast disease - refining practice will increase effectiveness and reduce harm.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
- The Revised Champion's Health Belief Model Scale: Predictive Validity Among Brazilian Women.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop methods to model the relationship between cancer detection and recall rates to inform professional standards.
methodsAnnual screening programme information for each of the 80 English NHSBSP units (totalling 11.3 million screening tests) for the seven screening years from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2016 and some Dutch screening programme information were used to produce linear and non-linear models. The non-linear models estimated the modelled maximum values (MMV) for cancers detected at different grades and estimated how rapidly the MMV was reached (the modelled 'slope' (MS)). Main outcomes include the detection rate for combined invasive/micro-invasive and high-grade DCIS (IHG) detection rate and the low/intermediate grade DCIS (LIG) detection rate.
resultsAt prevalent screens for IHG cancers, 99% of the MMV was reached at a recall rate of 7.0%. The LIG detection rate had no discernible plateau, increasing linearly at a rate of 0.12 per 1000 for every 1% increase in recall rate. At incident screens, 99% of the MMV for IHG cancer detection was 4.0%. LIG DCIS increased linearly at a rate of 0.18 per 1000 per 1% increase in recall rate.
conclusionsOur models demonstrate the diminishing returns associated with increasing recall rates. The screening programme in England could use the models to set recall rate ranges, and other countries could explore similar methodology. KEY POINTS: • Question: How can we determine optimum recall rates in breast cancer screening? • Findings: In this large observational study, we show that increases in recall rates above defined levels are almost exclusively associated with false positive recalls and a very small increase in low/intermediate grade DCIS. • Meaning: High recall rates are not associated with increases in detection of life-threatening cancers. The models developed in this paper can be used to help set recall rate ranges that maximise benefit and minimise harm.
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.