GuidelineJAMA2024
Screening for Breast Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.
Guideline in JAMA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 253 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
253 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Health Economic Evaluations of Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Systematic Review Focusing on Methodology and Quality Assessment.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Italian guidelines for the use of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening programmes: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT of the European guidelines.La Radiologia medica · 2026Guideline
- Patient-clinician communication in longitudinal care settings about adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and adult traumas: A systematic review of reviews.Patient education and counseling · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Performance of artificial intelligence-assisted ultrasound elastography in classifying benign and malignant breast tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical imaging · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of Online Interactive Decision Tools on Women's Decision-Making Regarding Breast Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Does Messaging for Reducing Breast Cancer Overscreening in Older Women Have Differential Responses among Medical Minimizers and Maximizers?Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Trial
- Assessing racial disparities in disease outcomes of patients with high-risk, triple-negative breast cancer and residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy: a post-hoc analysis of the ECOG-ACRIN 1131 clinical trial.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Trial
- Investigation of the effectiveness of cooling spray on mammography comfort.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- The effect of conflicting versus consistent messaging on older women's support for breast cancer screening cessation.Patient education and counseling · 2025Trial
- Article
- Clinical management of clonal hematopoiesis.Cancer · 2026Review
- Circulating Inflammatory Markers and Mammographic Density Phenotypes: a Mendelian Randomization Analysis.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Estimating the carcinogenesis timelines in early-onset versus late-onset cancers and changes across birth cohorts.Science advances · 2026Article
- A Bayesian bivariate spatial modeling framework for stage-specific cancer incidence and targeting of screening efforts.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Radiological review of interval breast cancers following screening with DBT + DM or DM: results from MAITA project randomized trials.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- Breast cancer mortality by age and race and/or ethnicity across counties in the United States, 2000-2019.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Historical Redlining and Spatiotemporal Patterns in Breast Cancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Completeness and Timeliness of Diagnostic Follow-up for Mammograms in Palau, 2019-2024.Hawai'i journal of health & social welfare · 2026Article
- Article
193 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
- SummaryForPatientsIn
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Among all US women, breast cancer is the second most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer death. In 2023, an estimated 43 170 women died of breast cancer. Non-Hispanic White women have the highest incidence of breast cancer and non-Hispanic Black women have the highest mortality rate. Objective: The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different mammography-based breast cancer screening strategies by age to start and stop screening, screening interval, modality, use of supplemental imaging, or personalization of screening for breast cancer on the incidence of and progression to advanced breast cancer, breast cancer morbidity, and breast cancer-specific or all-cause mortality, and collaborative modeling studies to complement the evidence from the review. Population: Cisgender women and all other persons assigned female at birth aged 40 years or older at average risk of breast cancer. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that biennial screening mammography in women aged 40 to 74 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older and the balance of benefits and harms of supplemental screening for breast cancer with breast ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), regardless of breast density. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 40 to 74 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of supplemental screening for breast cancer using breast ultrasonography or MRI in women identified to have dense breasts on an otherwise negative screening mammogram. (I statement).
Indexed as
Identifiers
38687503What 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.