Trial reportJAMA internal medicine2023
Automated Opt-Out vs Opt-In Patient Outreach Strategies for Breast Cancer Screening: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA internal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05313737 (Opt-in vs. Opt-out Mammography Screening Outreach), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Opt-in vs. Opt-out Mammography Screening Outreach: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Evidence Map of the Women Veterans' Health Literature, 2016 to 2023: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Behaviorally Informed Text Message Nudges to Schedule COVID-19 Vaccinations: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Enhancing Recruitment in Urinary Incontinence Care: Insights from the EvidenceNOW Managing Urinary Incontinence Initiative.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- A global scoping review of interventions to increase participation in screening programmes for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer between 2016 and 2025.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Patient-Centered Prioritization of Health Care Processes for Multimorbidity.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Retrospective Radiology Research: Do We Need Informed Patient Consent?Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Increasing screening for breast cancer using a randomized evaluation of electronic health record nudges: Design and rationale of the I-screen clinical trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2025Article
- Pilot implementation study of a default genetic referral process for patients with early-onset colorectal cancer.Genetics in medicine open · 2025Article
- Errors in the Abstract Results and Figure.JAMA internal medicine · 2024Article
- Designing Effective and Appropriate Opt-Out Approaches for Patient Outreach.JAMA internal medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Optimal strategies for population-based outreach for breast cancer screening remain unknown. Objective: To evaluate the effect on breast cancer screening of an opt-out automatic mammography referral strategy compared with an opt-in automated telephone message strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 2022 to January 2023 at a single Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center. Participants were female veterans aged 45 to 75 years who were eligible for breast cancer screening and enrolled in VA primary care. Intervention: Veterans were randomized 1:1 to receive either an automatic mammography referral (opt-out arm) or an automated telephone call with an option for mammography referral (opt-in arm). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was completed mammography 100 days after outreach. Secondary outcomes were scheduled or completed mammography by 100 days after outreach and referrals canceled if mammography was not scheduled within 90 days. Both intention-to-treat analyses and a restricted analysis were conducted. The restricted analysis excluded veterans who were unable to be reached by telephone (eg, a nonworking number) or who were found to be ineligible after randomization (eg, medical record documentation of recent mammography). Results: Of 883 veterans due for mammography (mean [SD] age, 59.13 [8.24] years; 656 [74.3%] had received prior mammography), 442 were randomized to the opt-in group and 441 to the opt-out group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in the primary outcome of completed mammography at 100 days between the opt-out and opt-in groups (67 [15.2%] vs 66 [14.9%]; P = .90) or the secondary outcome of completed or scheduled mammography (84 [19%] vs 106 [24.0%]; P = .07). A higher number of referrals were canceled in the opt-out group compared with the opt-in group (104 [23.6%] vs 24 [5.4%]; P < .001). The restricted analysis demonstrated similar results except more veterans completed or scheduled mammography within 100 days in the opt-out group compared with the opt-in group (102 of 388 [26.3%] vs 80 of 415 [19.3%]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, an opt-out population-based breast cancer screening outreach approach compared with an opt-in approach did not result in a significant difference in mammography completion but did lead to substantially more canceled mammography referrals, increasing staff burden. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05313737.
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.