ArticleBMC cancer2019
Flemish breast cancer screening programme: 15 years of key performance indicators (2002-2016).
Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Test performance metrics for breast, cervical, colon, and lung cancer screening: a systematic review.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Pooled it
- The effect of a pre-scheduled appointment on attendance in a population-based mammography screening programme.European journal of public health · 2023Trial
- Comparison of Artificial Intelligence Detection and Short-Term Breast Cancer Risk Models within and beyond Their Intended Use in Mammography Screening.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Article
- Applying the "positive predictive value-recall diagram" to monitor performance and provide recommendations for screening radiologists.European radiology · 2026Article
- Understanding the profile of community health workers in breast cancer screening education: women's preferences and insights from a qualitative focus group study.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Key Performance Indicators Applied in Medicine.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2025Article
- From barriers to participation: co-creating an effective reminder letter for breast cancer screening among underserved women in Flanders.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- The effect on attendance of the requirement to confirm a pre-scheduled appointment in a population-based mammography screening programme.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Relationship between health-related determinants and adherence to breast and colorectal cancer screening: a population-based study in Flanders, Belgium.European journal of public health · 2024Article
- Trends in socioeconomic inequalities in cause-specific premature mortality in Belgium, 1998-2019.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of Organized Mammography Screening for Different Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes.Cancers · 2022Article
- Flemish population-based cancer screening programs: impact of COVID-19 related shutdown on short-term key performance indicators.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- The Role of Socio-Demographic Factors in the Coverage of Breast Cancer Screening: Insights From a Quantile Regression Analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Coverage determinants of breast cancer screening in Flanders: an evaluation of the past decade.International journal for equity in health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe examined 15 years of key performance indicators (KPIs) of the population-based mammography screening programme (PMSP) in Flanders, Belgium.
methodsIndividual screening data were linked to the national cancer registry to obtain oncological follow-up. We benchmarked crude KPI results against KPI-targets set by the European guidelines and KPI results of other national screening programmes. Temporal trends were examined by plotting age-standardised KPIs against the year of screening and estimating the Average Annual Percentage Change (AAPC).
resultsPMSP coverage increased significantly over the period of 15 years (+ 7.5% AAPC), but the increase fell to + 1.6% after invitation coverage was maximised. In 2016, PMSP coverage was at 50.0% and opportunistic coverage was at 14.1%, resulting in a total coverage by screening of 64.2%. The response to the invitations was 49.8% in 2016, without a trend. Recall rate decreased significantly (AAPC -1.5% & -5.0% in initial and subsequent regular screenings respectively) while cancer detection remained stable (AAPC 0.0%). The result was an increased positive predictive value (AAPC + 3.8%). Overall programme sensitivity was stable and was at 65.1% in 2014. In initial screens of 2015, the proportion of DCIS, tumours stage II+, and node negative invasive cancers was 18.2, 31.2, and 61.6% respectively. In subsequent regular screens of 2015, those proportions were 14.0, 24.8, and 65.4% respectively. Trends were not significant.
conclusionBesides a suboptimal attendance rate, most KPIs in the Flemish PMSP meet EU benchmark targets. Nonetheless, there are several priorities for further investigation such as a critical evaluation of strategies to increase screening participation, organising a biennial radiological review of interval cancers, analysing the effect that preceding opportunistic screening has on the KPI for initial screenings, and efforts to estimate the impact on breast cancer mortality.
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.