SynthesisBMC cancer2020
Effectiveness of clinical breast examination as a 'stand-alone' screening modality: an overview of systematic reviews.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
48 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Facilitators and barriers to the decision-making of breast cancer screening in female residents in Mainland China: a systematic literature review.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Awareness regarding breast cancer amongst women in Pakistan: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Training health workers in clinical breast examination for early detection of breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Review
- Effectiveness of health education interventions on breast cancer literacy and breast screening uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Breast Cancer Awareness and Screening Predictors in Young Saudi Women: Findings From a Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Clinical Breast Examination Uptake among Reproductive Aged Women in Zambia: Evidence from the 2024 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey.Research square · 2026Article
- National policies for screening and early detection of breast cancer around the globe: Practices, barriers, and solutions.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- In Search of Ideal Solutions for Cancer Diagnosis: From Conventional Methods to Protein Biomarkers in Liquid Biopsy.Proteomes · 2025Review
- Breast Cancer Screening Using Clinical Breast Examination: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for South Africa.Value in health regional issues · 2025Article
- Main challenges to cancer care in Latin America: an analysis through breast cancer lenses.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2025Review
- Evaluation of performance indicators of a national breast cancer screening program in Casablanca, Morocco.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Factors associated with breast cancer detection method in California women: an analysis of California Health Interview Survey data.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- A real world evaluation of an innovative artificial intelligence tool for population-level breast cancer screening.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- An economic evaluation of breast cancer interventions in Kenya.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Barriers to Follow-Up of an Abnormal Clinical Breast Examination in Uttar Pradesh, India: A Qualitative Study.JCO global oncology · 2024Article
- Correlations of Imaging and Therapy in Breast Cancer Based on Molecular Patterns: An Important Issue in the Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is uncertainty about the effectiveness of clinical breast examination (CBE) and conflicting recommendations regarding its usefulness as a screening tool for breast cancer. This paper provides an overview of systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of CBE as a 'stand-alone' screening modality for breast cancer compared to no screening and focused on its value in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews reporting the effectiveness of CBE published prior to October 29, 2019. The main outcomes assessed were mortality and down staging. The AMSTAR 2 checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the reviews including risk of bias.
resultsEleven systematic reviews published between 1993 and 2019 were identified. There was no direct evidence that CBE reduced breast cancer mortality. Indirect evidence suggested that a well-performed CBE achieved the same effect as mammography regarding mortality despite its apparently lower sensitivity (40-69% for CBE vs 77-95% for mammography). Greater sensitivity was recorded among younger and Asian women. Moreover, CBE contributed between 17 and 47% of the shift from advanced to early stage cancer.
conclusionsCBE merits attention from health system and service planners in LMICs where a national screening programme based on mammography would be prohibitively expensive. In particular, it is likely that considerable value would be gained from conducting implementation scientific research in countries with large numbers of Asian women and/or where younger women are at higher risk. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, registration number CRD42019126798 .
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.