ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Breast Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Results From Real-World Health Records Data.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retrospective Analysis of Long-term Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Mammographic Breast Cancer Screening.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2026Article
- Breast cancer patients treated at a New York City academic health system during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021 had delayed presentations and more advanced disease than pre-pandemic cases.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Breast cancer screening among individuals with a substance use disorder: a retrospective cohort study.Family practice · 2025Article
- Changes in female cancer diagnostic billing rates over the COVID-19 period in the Ontario Health Insurance Plan.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe COVID-19 pandemic abruptly interrupted breast cancer screening, an essential preventive service in primary care. We aimed to evaluate the pandemic's impact on overall and follow-up breast cancer screening using real-world health records data.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed a cohort of women eligible for breast cancer screening through the study period from January 1, 2017 to February 28, 2022 using TriNetX Research Network data. We examined the temporal trend of monthly screening volume throughout the study period and compared the rate of adherence to follow-up screening within 24 months after the previous screening when the follow-up screening was due in the pre-COVID period vs the COVID period. To account for multiple screenings in the longitudinal data, we applied a logistic regression model using generalized estimating equations with adjustment for individual-level covariates.
resultsAmong 1,186,669 screening-eligible women, the monthly screening volume temporarily decreased by 80.6% from February to April 2020 and then rebounded to close to pre-COVID levels by June 2020. Yet, the follow-up screening rate decreased from 78.9% (95% CI, 78.8%-79.0%) in the pre-COVID period to 77.7% (95% CI, 77.6%-77.8%) in the COVID period. Multivariate regression analysis also showed a lower adherence to follow-up screening during the COVID period (odds ratio = 0.86; 0.86-0.87) and a greater pandemic impact among women aged 65 years and older and women of non-Hispanic "other" race (Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander).
conclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic had a transient negative effect on breast cancer screening overall and a prolonged negative effect on follow-up screening. It also exacerbated gaps in adherence to follow-up screening, especially among certain vulnerable groups, requiring innovative strategies to address potential health disparities in primary care.
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.