ArticleBMC cancer2020
What are the benefits and harms of risk stratified screening as part of the NHS breast screening Programme? Study protocol for a multi-site non-randomised comparison of BC-predict versus usual screening (NCT04359420).
Article in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04359420 (What Are the Benefits and Harms of Risk Stratified Screening as Part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme), which is not on this map. Cited by 44 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.
What Are the Benefits and Harms of Risk Stratified Screening as Part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme: Study Protocol for a Multi-site Non-randomised Comparison of BC-Predict Versus Usual Screening
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed, 91 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychological impact of risk-stratified screening as part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme: multi-site non-randomised comparison of BC-Predict versus usual screening (NCT04359420).British journal of cancer · 2023Trial
- Implementing a Risk-Stratified National Breast Screening Programme in the United Kingdom: A Model-Based Cost-effectiveness Analysis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Earlier screening, better outcomes? Revisiting breast cancer screening guidelines for women in their 40s.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026Article
- Article
- Profile of the BREATHE cohort for risk-based breast screening in Singapore.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Defining Lifetime Risk Thresholds for Breast Cancer Surgical Prevention.JAMA oncology · 2025Article
- Illness risk representations underlying women's breast cancer risk appraisals: A theory-informed qualitative analysis.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Delivering Multifactorial Risk Assessment and Communication for Personalized Breast Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study Exploring Implementation in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Clinical validation of an integrated risk assessment test incorporating genomic and non-genomic data for sporadic breast cancer in Colombia.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Stratified/risk-based screening for colorectal cancer in the UK: an overview.Colorectal cancer · 2025Review
- Do women with a history of breast cancer recommend risk-based breast cancer screening? An in-depth interview study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- CanRisk-GP protocol: A feasibility study of incorporating proactive multifactorial breast cancer risk assessment into general practice.PloS one · 2025Article
- Risk-Adapted Breast Screening for Women at Low Predicted Risk of Breast Cancer: An Online Discrete Choice Experiment.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review.Preventive medicine · 2024Article
- Attitudes towards risk-stratified breast cancer screening: a population-based survey among 5,001 Danish women.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening in Malaysia: Challenges and Opportunities.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Review
- How do women at increased risk of breast cancer make sense of their risk? An interpretative phenomenological analysis.British journal of health psychology · 2023Article
- Impact of a risk based breast screening decision aid on understanding, acceptance and decision making.NPJ breast cancer · 2023Article
- What do women think about having received their breast cancer risk as part of a risk-stratified NHS Breast Screening Programme? A qualitative study.British journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Quantifying the effects of risk-stratified breast cancer screening when delivered in real time as routine practice versus usual screening: the BC-Predict non-randomised controlled study (NCT04359420).British journal of cancer · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn principle, risk-stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) should produce a better balance of benefits and harms. The main benefit is the offer of NICE-approved more frequent screening and/ or chemoprevention for women who are at increased risk, but are unaware of this. We have developed BC-Predict, to be offered to women when invited to NHSBSP which collects information on risk factors (self-reported information on family history and hormone-related factors via questionnaire; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms). BC-Predict produces risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5 to < 8% 10-year) to have discussion of prevention and early detection options at Family History, Risk and Prevention Clinics. Despite the promise of systems such as BC-Predict, there are still too many uncertainties for a fully-powered definitive trial to be appropriate or ethical. The present research aims to identify these key uncertainties regarding the feasibility of integrating BC-Predict into the NHSBSP. Key objectives of the present research are to quantify important potential benefits and harms, and identify key drivers of the relative cost-effectiveness of embedding BC-Predict into NHSBSP.
methodsA non-randomised fully counterbalanced study design will be used, to include approximately equal numbers of women offered NHSBSP (n = 18,700) and BC-Predict (n = 18,700) from selected screening sites (n = 7). In the initial 8-month time period, women eligible for NHSBSP will be offered BC-Predict in four screening sites. Three screening sites will offer women usual NHSBSP. In the following 8-months the study sites offering usual NHSBSP switch to BC-Predict and vice versa. Key potential benefits including uptake of risk consultations, chemoprevention and additional screening will be obtained for both groups. Key potential harms such as increased anxiety will be obtained via self-report questionnaires, with embedded qualitative process analysis. A decision-analytic model-based cost-effectiveness analysis will identify the key uncertainties underpinning the relative cost-effectiveness of embedding BC-Predict into NHSBSP. DISCUSSION: We will assess the feasibility of integrating BC-Predict into the NHSBSP, and identify the main uncertainties for a definitive evaluation of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of BC-Predict.
trial registrationRetrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359420).
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.