ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2023
Associated morbidity in screened and diagnosed breast cancer patients: a retrospective study.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- A nomogram based on conventional ultrasound and elastography for diagnosing BI-RADS category 3-5 lesions.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBreast cancer (BC) screening has been associated with reduced mortality and morbidity. This study compares tumor characteristics and treatment morbidity in screened versus diagnosed women. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study, conducted between 2010 and 2013, included 666 BC screened or diagnosed patients. We compared patients and tumors characteristics and received treatments. We also analyzed the results after excluding patients at risk of BC and conducted a multivariate analysis to assess odds ratios (OR).
resultsScreened women had smaller tumors (16,5 vs 22,6 mm, p < 0.001), of lower grade (p < 0.001) with a lower proliferation index (PI) (p < 0.001) than diagnosed women. Screened women were more frequently treated using conservative surgery (82.8% vs 59.7%, p < 0.001), needed less often axillary dissection (15.1% vs 35.4%, p < 0.001) and less often chemotherapy (20.8% vs 48.3% p < 0.001) than diagnosed women. In the multivariate analysis after adjustment for age and BC history, diagnosed women had increased (OR: 4.79, 95% IC: 3.19-7,18) risk to be administered chemotherapy and to undergo axillary dissection (OR: 4.18, 95% IC: 1.56-11.17) than screened women.
conclusionPatients should be informed about the benefits in terms of morbidity that screening confers to them.
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.