ArticleAmerican journal of public health2019
Association of State Dense Breast Notification Laws With Supplemental Testing and Cancer Detection After Screening Mammography.
Article in American journal of public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of mandatory mammographic breast density notification on supplemental screening practice in the United States: a systematic review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Pooled it
- Government regulation of private health insurance.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Dense Breast Legislation and Supplemental Breast Imaging Among Women Undergoing Mammography.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Changes in Use, Cost, and Value of Breast Cancer Screening Among Older Women in the US.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Where are we now and where do we go from here? A structured literature review analyzing the current state of breast density research trends and discussions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Review
- Protocol for a pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomized clinical trial testing behavioral economic implementation strategies to increase supplemental breast MRI screening among patients with extremely dense breasts.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- Breast cancer risk characteristics of women undergoing whole-breast ultrasound screening versus mammography alone.Cancer · 2023Article
- Insurance Coverage Mandates and the Adoption of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Relation of Quantitative Histologic and Radiologic Breast Tissue Composition Metrics With Invasive Breast Cancer Risk.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Article
- Characteristics Associated with Participation in ENGAGED 2 - A Web-based Breast Cancer Risk Communication and Decision Support Trial.The Permanente journal · 2020Article
- Breast cancer supplemental screening: Women's knowledge and utilization in the era of dense breast legislation.Cancer medicine · 2020Article
- The Impact of Massachusetts Health Reform on Colorectal and Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis.Medical care · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the association of state dense breast notification (DBN) laws with use of supplemental tests and cancer diagnosis after screening mammography.
methodsWe examined screening mammograms (n = 1 441 544) performed in 2014 and 2015 among privately insured women aged 40 to 59 years living in 9 US states that enacted DBN laws in 2014 to 2015 and 25 US states with no DBN law in effect. DBN status at screening mammography was categorized as no DBN, generic DBN, and DBN that mandates notification of possible benefits of supplemental screening (DBN+SS). We used logistic regression to examine the change in rate of supplemental ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, breast biopsy, and breast cancer detection.
resultsDBN+SS laws were associated with 10.5 more ultrasounds per 1000 mammograms (95% CI = 3.0, 17.6 per 1000; P = .006) and 0.37 more breast cancers detected per 1000 mammograms (95% CI = 0.05, 0.69 per 1000; P = .02) compared with no DBN law. No significant differences were found for generic DBN laws in either ultrasound or cancer detection.
conclusionsDBN legislation is associated with increased use of ultrasound and cancer detection after implementation only when notification of the possible benefits of supplemental screening is required.
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.