Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30782874›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Evaluation of the overdiagnosis in breast screening programmes using a Monte Carlo simulation tool: a study of the influence of the parameters defining the programme configuration.

Cristina Forastero, Luis I Zamora, Damián Guirado, Antonio M Lallena

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

4 authors.

Cristina ForasteroUnidad de Radiofísica, Hospital Univ. San Cecilio, Granada, Spain.
Luis I ZamoraServicio de Física y Protección Radiológica, Hospital Reg. Univ. Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain.
Damián GuiradoUnidad de Radiofísica, Hospital Univ. San Cecilio, Granada, Spain.
Antonio M LallenaDepartamento de Física Atómica, Molecular y Nuclear, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1962-6217

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo build up and test a Monte Carlo simulation procedure for the investigation of overdiagnosis in breast screening programmes (BSPs).

designA Monte Carlo tool previously developed has been adapted for obtaining the quantities of interest in order to determine the overdiagnosis: the annual and cumulative number of cancers detected by screening, plus interval cancers, for a population following the BSP, and detected clinically for the same population in the absence of screening. Overdiagnosis is obtained by comparing these results in a direct way.

resultsOverdiagnosis between 7% and 20%, depending on the specific configuration of the programme, have been found. These range of values is in agreement with some of the results available for actual BSPs. In the cases analysed, a reduction of 11% at most has been found in the number of invasive tumours detected by screening in comparison to those clinically detected in the control population. It has been possible to establish that overdiagnosis is almost entirely linked to ductal carcinoma in situ tumours.

conclusionsThe use of Monte Carlo tools may facilitate the analysis of overdiagnosis in actual BSPs, permitting to address the role played by various quantities of relevance for them.

Indexed as

Monte Carlo MethodAdultAgedBreast Carcinoma In SituBreast NeoplasmsComputer SimulationEarly Detection of CancerFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansIncidenceMammographyMedical OveruseMiddle AgedSpainbreast screening programmesinvasive/in-situ tumorsMonte Carlooverdiagnosis

Identifiers

PMID30782874
PMCPMC6398694

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.