Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33932123›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2021

A systematic review of recommendations on screening strategies for breast cancer due to hereditary predisposition: Who, When, and How?

Yitong Cai, Jiang Li, Ya Gao, Kelu Yang, Jie He, Ni Li, Jinhui Tian

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Obesity as a Risk Factor for Breast Cancer-The Role of miRNA.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yitong CaiEvidence-Based Center, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Jiang LiNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Ya GaoEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Kelu YangEvidence-Based Center, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Jie HeNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Ni LiNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jinhui TianEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0054-2454
Lanzhou University · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer is a global health problem that cannot be underestimated. Many studies have shown that breast cancer is related to pathogenic mutations in hereditary predisposition genes. Clinical practice guidelines play a vital role in guiding the selection of breast cancer screening. Little is known about the quality and consistency of guidelines' recommendations and their changes over these years.

methodsWe reviewed the existing screening guidelines for genetic susceptibility to breast cancer and assessed the methodological quality, and summarized the recommendations to aid clinicians to make decisions. We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and guideline-specific databases, aiming to find the guidelines of breast cancer due to hereditary predisposition. The necessary information was exacted by Excel. We also summarized different evidence grading systems. The qualities of the guidelines were assessed by the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.

resultsA total of 54 recommendations from 13 guidelines were extracted. Generally speaking, the recommendations were consistent, mainly focusing on mammography and MRI.

conclusionsThe recommendations differ in details. Moreover, different guidelines are based on different grading systems, and some guidelines are not divided for age limits, which may limit the promotion and implementation of the guidelines. It is suggested that improvement can be made in this regard in the future.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsDatabases, FactualEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMass ScreeningAGREE IIbreast cancergenetic mutatedguidelinescreening

Identifiers

PMID33932123
PMCPMC8124106
OpenAlexW3157774878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.