ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2019
Comparison of Questionnaire-Based Breast Cancer Prediction Models in the Nurses' Health Study.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
- Generalizability of an AI-based mammogram risk score (MRS) for breast cancer among diverse populations of women.Science advances · 2026Article
- Article
- Performance of three breast cancer risk assessment tools in US Black women.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Addition of polygenic risk score to a risk calculator for prediction of breast cancer in US Black women.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- Validation of an Abridged Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model for the General Population.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2023Article
- A model for predicting both breast cancer risk and non-breast cancer death among women > 55 years old.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2023Article
- A Validated Risk Prediction Model for Breast Cancer in US Black Women.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021Article
- Validation of breast cancer risk assessment tools on a French-Canadian population-based cohort.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Simplified Breast Risk Tool Integrating Questionnaire Risk Factors, Mammographic Density, and Polygenic Risk Score: Development and Validation.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Gail model and the model developed by Tyrer and Cuzick are two questionnaire-based approaches with demonstrated ability to predict development of breast cancer in a general population.
methodsWe compared calibration, discrimination, and net reclassification of these models, using data from questionnaires sent every 2 years to 76,922 participants in the Nurses' Health Study between 1980 and 2006, with 4,384 incident invasive breast cancers identified by 2008 (median follow-up, 24 years; range, 1-28 years). In a random one third sample of women, we also compared the performance of these models with predictions from the Rosner-Colditz model estimated from the remaining participants.
resultsBoth the Gail and Tyrer-Cuzick models showed evidence of miscalibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow
conclusionsBoth the Gail and Tyrer-Cuzick models had some ability to discriminate breast cancer cases and noncases, but have limitations in their model fit. IMPACT: Refinements may be needed to questionnaire-based approaches to predict breast cancer in older and higher-risk women.
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.