ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2023
Recommendations for the Screening of Breast Cancer of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Brazilian Society of Mastology and Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Association.
Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cracking the code: Pioneering early detection and management of breast cancer in the Brazilian public healthcare system.Dialogues in health · 2025Review
- Factors associated with false-positive screening mammography in São Paulo, Brazil.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Subsequent mammography reduces recall and increases breast cancer detection: an audit of a screening program.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2025Article
- The negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer tackle in Brazil's public and private healthcare system: time series study between 2014 and 2022.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Comparison of Automated Breast Ultrasound and Hand-Held Breast Ultrasound in the Screening of Dense Breasts.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo present the update of the recommendations of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, the Brazilian Society of Mastology and the Brazilian Federation of Associations of Gynecology and Obstetrics for breast cancer screening in Brazil.
methodsScientific evidence published in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, CINAHL and Lilacs databases between January 2012 and July 2022 was searched. Recommendations were based on this evidence by consensus of the expert committee of the three entities. RECOMMENDATIONS: Annual mammography screening is recommended for women at usual risk aged 40-74 years. Above 75 years, it should be reserved for those with a life expectancy greater than seven years. Women at higher than usual risk, including those with dense breasts, with a personal history of atypical lobular hyperplasia, classic lobular carcinoma in situ, atypical ductal hyperplasia, treatment for breast cancer or chest irradiation before age 30, or even, carriers of a genetic mutation or with a strong family history, benefit from complementary screening, and should be considered individually. Tomosynthesis is a form of mammography and should be considered in screening whenever accessible and available.
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.