ArticleBMJ open2022
Understanding linkage to biopsy and treatment for breast cancer after a high-risk telemammography result in Peru: a mixed-methods study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interventions to improve timely cancer diagnosis: an integrative review.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Review
- Detection of Estrogen Receptor Status in Breast Cancer Cytology Samples by an Optical Nanosensor.Advanced nanobiomed research · 2025Article
- Rapid differentiation of estrogen receptor status in patient biopsy breast cancer aspirates with an optical nanosensor.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis mixed-method study aimed to understand the effectiveness of linkage to biopsy and treatment in women with a high-risk mammography result (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS 4 and 5) in the national telemammography programme and to explore women's experiences during this process.
settingQuantitative component: we collected and linked health data from the telemammography reading centre, the national public health insurance, the national centre for disease control and the national referral cancer centre. Qualitative component: we interviewed participants from different regions of the country representing diverse social and geographical backgrounds.
participantsQuantitative: women who underwent telemammography between July 2017 and September 2018 and had high-risk results (BI-RADS 4-5) were collected. Qualitative: women with a high-risk telemammography result, healthcare providers and administrators. OUTCOMES MEASURES: Quantitative: we determined biopsy and treatment linkage rates and delays. Qualitative: we explored barriers and facilitators for obtaining a biopsy and initiating treatment.
resultsOf 126 women with high-risk results, 48.4% had documentation of biopsy and 37.5% experienced a delay of >45 days to biopsy. Of 51 women diagnosed with breast cancer, 86.4% had evidence of treatment initiation, but 69.2% initiated treatment >45 days after biopsy. Travelling to major cities for care, administrative factors and breast cancer misconceptions, among other factors, impeded timely, continuous care for breast cancer. A multidisciplinary and culturally tailored patient education facilitated understanding of the disease and prompt decision making about subsequent medical care.
conclusionsStrengthened breast cancer care capacity outside the capital city, standardised referral pathways, ensured financial support for travel expenses, and enhanced patient education are required to secure linkage to the breast cancer care continuum. Robust information systems are needed to track patients and to evaluate the programme's performance.
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.