Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35897000›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2022

Patient, primary care provider, and stakeholder perspectives on mammography screening frequency: lessons learned from a qualitative study.

Vicky Ro, Tarsha Jones, Thomas Silverman, Julia E McGuinness, Ashlee Guzman, Jacquelyn Amenta, Rita Kukafka, Katherine D Crew

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vicky RoColumbia University Irving Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, New York, NY, 10032, USA. vir7010@nyp.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3502-2707
Tarsha JonesFlorida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
Thomas SilvermanColumbia University Irving Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Julia E McGuinnessColumbia University Irving Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Ashlee GuzmanColumbia University Irving Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Jacquelyn AmentaColumbia University Irving Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Rita KukafkaColumbia University Irving Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Katherine D CrewColumbia University Irving Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Columbia University Irving Medical Center · USFlorida Atlantic University · US

Funding

Tumor Biology and Microenvironment ProgramP30CA013696 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Anil K Rustgi · 1985 to 2026
$115.3M
Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000040 · NCATS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GINSBERG, HENRY N · 2012 to 2015
$26.2M
Increasing breast cancer chemoprevention in the primary care settingR01CA177995 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CREW, KATHERINE D, KUKAFKA, RITA · 2014 to 2018
$3.5M
Multicenter trial of decision support for breast cancer chemopreventionR01CA226060 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CREW, KATHERINE D, KUKAFKA, RITA · 2019 to 2023
$3.3M
Decision Support for Multigene Panel Testing and Family Risk Communication among Racially/Ethnically Diverse Young Breast Cancer SurvivorsK01CA241393 · NCI · FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY · PI JONES, TARSHA · 2021 to 2025
$773k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000040NCI NIH HHS K01 CA241393NCI NIH HHS P30 CA013696NCI NIH HHS R01 CA177995NCI NIH HHS R01CA177995NCI NIH HHS R01 CA226060NCI NIH HHS R01CA226060
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundU.S. professional organizations have provided conflicting recommendations on annual vs. biennial mammography screening. Potential harms of more frequent screening include increased anxiety and costs of false positive results, including unnecessary breast biopsies and overdiagnosis.

objectiveTo characterize current practices and beliefs surrounding mammography screening frequency and perspectives on using risk-based screening to inform screening intervals.

designSemi-structured interviews informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

participantsPatients, primary care providers (PCPs), third-party stakeholders (breast radiologists, radiology administrators, patient advocates). MAIN MEASURES: Qualitative data, with a codebook developed based upon prespecified implementation science constructs. KEY

resultsWe interviewed 25 patients, 11 PCPs, and eight key stakeholders, including three radiologists, two radiology administrators, and three patient advocates. Most patients reported having annual mammograms, however, half believed having mammograms every two years was acceptable. Some women were worried early breast cancer would be missed if undergoing biennial screening. PCPs were equally split between recommending annual and biennial mammograms. Although PCPs were interested in using breast cancer risk models to inform screening decisions, concerns raised include time burden and lack of familiarity with breast cancer risk assessment tools. All breast radiologists believed patients should receive annual mammograms, while patient advocates and radiology administrators were split between annual vs. biennial. Radiologists were worried about missing breast cancer diagnoses when mammograms are not performed yearly. Patient advocates and radiology administrators were more open to biennial mammograms and utilizing risk-based screening.

conclusionsUncertainty remains across stakeholder groups regarding appropriate mammogram screening intervals. Radiologists recommend annual mammography, whereas patients and PCPs were evenly split between annual vs. biennial screening, although both favored annual screening among higher-risk women. Breast cancer risk assessment tools may help facilitate decisions about screening intervals, but face barriers to widespread implementation in the primary care setting. These results will inform future implementation strategies to adopt risk-stratified breast cancer screening.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMammographyEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass ScreeningPrimary Health CareTime FactorsBreast cancerMammographyRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID35897000
PMCPMC9326136
OpenAlexW4288723599

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.