Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38607569›Full record

ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2024

Screening mammography frequency following dense breast notification among a predominantly Hispanic/Latina screening cohort.

Erica J Lee Argov, Carmen B Rodriguez, Mariangela Agovino, Karen M Schmitt, Elise Desperito, Anita G Karr, Ying Wei, Mary Beth Terry, Parisa Tehranifar

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2024. 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 91% 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Erica J Lee ArgovDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168Th St., New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Carmen B RodriguezDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168Th St., New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Mariangela AgovinoDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168Th St., New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Karen M SchmittHerbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Elise DesperitoDepartment of Radiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Anita G KarrDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168Th St., New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Ying WeiDepartment of Biostatistics, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168Th St., New York, NY, USA.
Mary Beth TerryDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168Th St., New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Parisa TehranifarDepartment of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168Th St., New York, NY, 10032, USA. pt140@columbia.edu.
Columbia University · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · US

Funding

Impact of breast density information disclosure in racially diverse populationsR01MD011506 · NIMHD · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI TEHRANIFAR, PARISA · 2016 to 2020
$2.8M
NIMHD NIH HHS 1R01MD011506NIMHD NIH HHS R01 MD011506
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeNationally legislated dense breast notification (DBN) informs women of their breast density (BD) and the impact of BD on breast cancer risk and detection, but consequences for screening participation are unclear. We evaluated the association of DBN in New York State (NYS) with subsequent screening mammography in a largely Hispanic/Latina cohort.

methodsWomen aged 40-60 were surveyed in their preferred language (33% English, 67% Spanish) during screening mammography from 2016 to 2018. We used clinical BD classification from mammography records from 2013 (NYS DBN enactment) through enrollment (baseline) to create a 6-category variable capturing prior and new DBN receipt (sent only after clinically dense mammograms). We used this variable to compare the number of subsequent mammograms (0, 1, ≥ 2) from 10 to 30 months after baseline using ordinal logistic regression.

resultsIn a sample of 728 women (78% foreign-born, 72% Hispanic, 46% high school education or less), first-time screeners and women who received DBN for the first time after prior non-dense mammograms had significantly fewer screening mammograms within 30 months of baseline (Odds Ratios range: 0.33 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.12-0.85) to 0.38 (95% CI 0.17-0.82)) compared to women with prior mammography but no DBN. There were no differences in subsequent mammogram frequency between women with multiple DBN and those who never received DBN. Findings were consistent across age, language, health literacy, and education groups.

conclusionWomen receiving their first DBN after previous non-dense mammograms have lower mammography participation within 2.5 years. DBN has limited influence on screening participation of first-time screeners and those with persistent dense mammograms.

Indexed as

Breast DensityBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerHispanic or LatinoMammographyAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNew YorkBreast cancer screeningBreast densityBreast density notificationCancer screeningScreening mammography

Identifiers

PMID38607569
OpenAlexW4394760752

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.