Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31858624›Full record

ArticleThe Medical journal of Australia2020

Estimating the magnitude of cancer overdiagnosis in Australia.

Paul P Glasziou, Mark A Jones, Thanya Pathirana, Alexandra L Barratt, Katy Jl Bell

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Medical journal of Australia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 59 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT05004792 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Correlation Between Online Case-based Training of Pathologists in Dermoscopic Images and Diagnostic Accuracy in Histopathological Interpretation of Skin Lesions Suspicious of Melanoma

TypeinterventionalSponsorHerlev HospitalRan2026 to 2027Enrolled258ConditionsMelanoma, Pigmented LesionsArmsDermLoop Learn
NCT05712551 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Diagnostic Agreement Among Expert Dermatopathologists on Skin Lesions Clinically Suspicious of Melanoma

TypeobservationalSponsorHerlev HospitalRan2023 to 2024Enrolled4ConditionsMelanoma (Skin), Pigmented Lesions
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A systematic review of microsimulation models for skin cancer.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A Clinical Perspective on Melanoma Overdiagnosis.The Australasian journal of dermatology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Fictitious cases as a methodology to discuss sensitive health topics in focus groups.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Impact of Breast Cancer Screening on 10-Year Net Survival in Canadian Women Age 40-49 Years.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Paul P GlasziouInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD.ORCID 0000-0001-7564-073X
Mark A JonesInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD.
Thanya PathiranaGriffith University, Sunshine Coast, QLD.
Alexandra L BarrattSydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
Katy Jl BellSydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.ORCID 0000-0002-0137-3218

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo estimate the proportion of cancer diagnoses in Australia that might reasonably be attributed to overdiagnosis by comparing current and past lifetime risks of cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsRoutinely collected Australian Institute of Health and Welfare national data were analysed to estimate recent (2012) and historical (1982) lifetime risks (adjusted for competing risk of death and changes in risk factors) of diagnoses with five cancers: prostate, breast, renal, thyroid cancers, and melanoma.

main outcome measureDifference in lifetime risks of cancer diagnosis between 1982 and 2012, interpreted as probable overdiagnosis.

resultsFor women, absolute lifetime risk increased by 3.4 percentage points for breast cancer (invasive cancers, 1.7 percentage points), 0.6 percentage point for renal cancer, 1.0 percentage point for thyroid cancer, and 5.1 percentage points for melanoma (invasive melanoma, 0.7 percentage point). An estimated 22% of breast cancers (invasive cancers, 13%), 58% of renal cancers, 73% of thyroid cancers, and 54% of melanomas (invasive melanoma, 15%) were overdiagnosed, or 18% of all cancer diagnoses (8% of invasive cancer diagnoses). For men, absolute lifetime risk increased by 8.2 percentage points for prostate cancer, 0.8 percentage point for renal cancer, 0.4 percentage point for thyroid cancer, and 8.0 percentage points for melanoma (invasive melanoma, 1.5 percentage points). An estimated 42% of prostate cancers, 42% of renal cancers, 73% of thyroid cancers, and 58% of melanomas (invasive melanomas, 22%) were overdiagnosed, or 24% of all cancer diagnoses (16% of invasive cancer diagnoses). Alternative assumptions slightly modified the estimates for overdiagnosis of breast cancer and melanoma.

conclusionsAbout 11 000 cancers in women and 18 000 in men may be overdiagnosed each year. Rates of overdiagnosis need to be reduced and health services should monitor emerging areas of overdiagnosis.

Indexed as

AustraliaEarly Detection of CancerFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleForecastingHumansMaleMass ScreeningMedical OveruseCancerEarly detection of cancerMass screeningQuality of health care

Identifiers

PMID31858624
PMCPMC7065073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.