Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30927689›Full record

SynthesisCancer epidemiology2019

The breast cancer paradox: A systematic review of the association between area-level deprivation and breast cancer screening uptake in Europe.

Dinah Smith, Katie Thomson, Clare Bambra, Adam Todd

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

63 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Dinah SmithSchool of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, King George VI Building, Newcastle 14 upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK.
Katie ThomsonInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Clare BambraInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
Adam ToddSchool of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, King George VI Building, Newcastle 14 upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK; Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: adam.todd@newcastle.ac.uk.

Funding

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKDepartment of HealthMedical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer rates are lower amongst women from more socio-economically deprived areas. However, their mortality rates are higher. One explanation of this breast cancer paradox is that women from more deprived areas are less likely to attend breast cancer screening programmes. This systematic review is the first to examine this issue in Europe. A systematic review of Embase, Medline and PsychINFO (from 2008 to 2019) was undertaken (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018083703). Observational studies were included if they were based in Europe, measured breast cancer screening uptake, compared at least two areas, included an area-level measure of socio-economic deprivation and were published in the English language. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist was used to assess study quality and risk of bias. Thirteen studies from seven different European countries met our inclusion criteria and were included in the review. In ten of the thirteen studies, there was a significant negative association between screening uptake and area-level socio-economic deprivation - with women living in more socio-economically deprived neighbourhoods less likely to attend breast cancer screening. Although universal screening programmes were provided in most studies, there were still strong negative associations between screening uptake and area-level socio-economic deprivation. Future breast cancer screening strategies should acknowledge these challenges, and consider developing targeted interventions in more deprived areas to increase screening participation.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerEuropeFemaleHumansPovertyQualitative ResearchSocioeconomic FactorsBreast cancerDeprivationEuropeHealth inequalitiesNeighbourhood effectsPreventionPublic healthScreeningSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30927689
PMCPMC6547165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.