ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2023
Spillover After Mammography Guideline Change: Evidence From State-Level Trends.
Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Associated with Omission of Axillary Lymph Node Dissection for Patients with Clinical Node-Positive Breast Cancer Who have Residual Nodal Disease on Pathology After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Observational
- Characteristics of the Newly Eligible Population under Two Recent Updates of Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- Long-term Mammography Screening Trends and Predictors of Return to Screening after the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results from a Statewide Registry.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionChanges to which age groups are recommended for mammography may have affected screening rates for all women. This spillover effect has not previously been shown empirically in a national sample.
methodsUsing data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System from 2002 to 2018, authors tested whether screening trends at a national level changed after the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guideline change. The authors also tested whether state-level screening trends for women aged 40-49 years and 75+ years were associated with screening trends for women aged 50-74 years. Analyses were conducted in March-December 2022.
resultsIn a model predicting state-level trends in screening for women aged 50-74 years, authors find positive, statistically significant associations with screening trends for women aged 40-49 years (p=0.033) and for women aged 75+ years (p<0.001).
conclusionsDeimplementation is difficult and important for controlling healthcare spending and delivering high value care. However, states most successful at reducing mammography screening rates among those aged 40-49 years and 75+ years also had greater reductions in recommended screening among women aged 50-74 years. More work is needed to understand and mitigate the unintended consequences of deimplementation.
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.