Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37085746›Full record

ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2023

Scientific uncertainty and perceived mammography benefits in women screened for breast cancer.

Teofilia Acheampong, Carmen B Rodríguez, Suzanne C O'Neill, Mariangela Agovino, Erica J Lee Argov, Parisa Tehranifar

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 66% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Teofilia AcheampongDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Carmen B RodríguezDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Suzanne C O'NeillLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Mariangela AgovinoDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Erica J Lee ArgovDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Parisa TehranifarDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. pt140@columbia.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0605-3934
Columbia University · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USGeorgetown University · US

Funding

Tumor Biology and Microenvironment ProgramP30CA013696 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Anil K Rustgi · 1985 to 2026
$115.3M
Impact of breast density information disclosure in racially diverse populationsR01MD011506 · NIMHD · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI TEHRANIFAR, PARISA · 2016 to 2020
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30CA013696NCI NIH HHS T32-CA009529NIMHD NIH HHS R01 MD011506
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePersonal aversion to scientific uncertainty may influence how women perceive the benefits of mammography, a breast cancer screening practice with conflicting scientific opinions and guidelines. Such associations may even exist among women who participate in screening.

methodsWe evaluated the distribution of aversion to ambiguous medical information (AA-Med), using a 6-item scale capturing the level of agreement with statements about obtaining a cancer screening test with conflicting medical recommendations in 665 women (aged 40-60 years; 79.5% Hispanic) recruited during screening mammography appointments in New York City. We assessed the association of AA-Med with perceptions of benefits of mammography (breast cancer mortality reduction, worry reduction, early detection, treatment improvement) using multivariable logistic regression.

resultsOver a quarter of participants expressed negative reactions to medical ambiguity about a cancer screening test (e.g., fear, lower trust in experts), but a majority endorsed intention to undergo screening. AA-Med was higher in women who were U.S.-born, non-Hispanic black, and had marginal to adequate health literacy, but there were no differences by clinical factors or screening experiences (e.g., family history, prior breast biopsy). Women with higher AA-Med were more likely to perceive treatment benefits from mammography (OR = 1.37, 95% CI = 0.99-1.90), but AA-Med was not associated with other perceived mammography benefits.

conclusionsAversion to uncertainty regarding cancer screening varies by sociodemographic characteristics but has limited associations with perceived mammography benefits in women who already participate in screening.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsBreastEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningUncertaintyAmbiguity aversionCancer screeningConflicting evidenceMammographyUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID37085746
OpenAlexW4366684647

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.