ArticleScientific reports2019
Assessing trends of breast cancer and carcinoma in situ to monitor screening policies in developing settings.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitude and practice toward postoperative upper limb exercise among patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer.BMC public health · 2025Article
- [Estimation of cancer incidence in Brazil and its regions in 2018: methodological aspects].Cadernos de saude publica · 2024Article
- Impacts of Sociodemographic Factors, Screening, and Organization of Health Services on Breast Cancer Mortality in Brazil: An Ecological Study of 20 Years.International journal of breast cancer · 2023Article
- Temporal trend of cancer mortality in a Brazilian state with a medium Human Development Index (1980-2018).Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Patient satisfaction and quality of life in breast reconstruction: assessment of outcomes of immediate, delayed, and nonreconstruction.BMC research notes · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There have been arguments about the role of breast cancer screening at the population level, and some points of controversy have arisen, such the establishment of organized screening policies and the age at which to begin screening. The real benefit of screening has been questioned because the results of this practice may increase the diagnosis of indolent lesions without decreasing mortality due to breast cancer. The authors have proposed a study of incidence and mortality trends for breast cancer in a developing setting in Brazil to monitor the effectiveness of the official recommendations that prioritize the age group from 50 to 69 years. The database of the Cancer Registry and the Mortality Information System was used to calculate age-standardized and age-specific rates, which were then used to calculate incidence and mortality trends using the Joinpoint Regression Program. The results showed stability in trends across all ages and age-specific groups in both incidence and mortality. In conclusion, we found that incidence and mortality rates are compatible with those in regions with similar human development indexes, and trends have demonstrated stabilization. Thus, we do not endorse changes in the official recommendations to conduct screening for ages other than 50 to 69 years, nor should policy makers implement organized screening strategies.
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.