Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34217424›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine2021

Prioritizing breast imaging services during the COVID pandemic: A survey of breast imaging facilities within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Brian L Sprague, Ellen S O'Meara, Christoph I Lee, Janie M Lee, Louise M Henderson, Diana S M Buist, Nila Alsheik, Teresita Macarol, Hannah Perry, Anna N A Tosteson and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Breast cancer care amidst a pandemic: a scoping review to understand the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on health services and health outcomes.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on rural and urban cancer patients' experiences, health behaviors, and perceptions.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Brian L SpragueOffice of Health Promotion Research, Department of Surgery, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, USA; Department of Radiology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, USA. Electronic address: bsprague@uvm.edu.
Ellen S O'MearaKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Christoph I LeeDepartment of Radiology, University of Washington and Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, USA.
Janie M LeeDepartment of Radiology, University of Washington and Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, USA.
Louise M HendersonDepartments of Radiology and Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Diana S M BuistKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Nila AlsheikAdvocate Aurora Health, System Breast Imaging, Downers Grove, IL, USA.
Teresita MacarolAdvocate Aurora Health, System Breast Imaging, Downers Grove, IL, USA.
Hannah PerryDepartment of Radiology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, USA.
Anna N A TostesonThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Tracy OnegaDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Karla KerlikowskeDepartments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Diana L MigliorettiKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA.

Funding

Translational Engineering in Cancer (TEC)P30CA023108 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Fred W Kolling IV · 1985 to 2026
$91.3M
Risk-based Imaging Strategies to Improve Breast Cancer Surveillance OutcomesP01CA154292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KARLA M KERLIKOWSKE · 2011 to 2026
$52.9M
Identifying effective risk-based supplemental ultrasound screening strategies for women with dense breastsR01CA248068 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI Diana L Miglioretti, Brian L Sprague · 2020 to 2026
$5.1M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA154292NCI NIH HHS P30 CA023108NCI NIH HHS R01 CA248068
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted breast cancer screening and diagnostic imaging in the United States. We sought to evaluate how medical facilities prioritized breast imaging services during periods of reduced capacity or upon re-opening after closures. In fall 2020, we surveyed 77 breast imaging facilities within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium in the United States. The survey ascertained the pandemic's impact on clinical practices during March-September 2020. Nearly all facilities (97%) reported closing or operating at reduced capacity at some point during this period. All facilities were open by August 2020, though 14% were still operating at reduced capacity in September 2020. During periods of re-opening or reduced capacity, 93% of facilities reported prioritizing diagnostic breast imaging over breast cancer screening. For diagnostic imaging, facilities prioritized based on rescheduling canceled appointments (89%), specific indication for diagnostic imaging (89%), patient demand (84%), individual characteristics and risk factors (77%), and time since last imaging examination (72%). For screening mammography, facilities prioritized based on rescheduled cancelations (96%), patient demand (83%), individual characteristics and risk factors (73%), and time since last mammogram (71%). For biopsy services, more than 90% of facilities reported prioritization based on rescheduling of canceled exams, patient demand, patient characteristics and risk factors and level of suspicion on imaging. The observed patterns from this large and geographically diverse sample of facilities in the United States indicate that multiple factors were commonly used to prioritize breast imaging services during periods of reduced capacity.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCOVID-19Early Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningPandemicsSARS-CoV-2United StatesBreast cancerBreast imagingCOVID-19Diagnostic imagingHealthcare deliveryHealth services researchMammographyPreventive servicesRadiologyScreening

Identifiers

PMID34217424
PMCPMC8241650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.