ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2024
Association Between False-Positive Results and Return to Screening Mammography in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Cohort.
Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Vacuum-assisted breast biopsy vs core needle biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- A Statewide Recommendation for Opt-Out Syphilis Screening in Nonpregnant Adults: Rationale and Evidence-to-Decision Framework.AJPM focus · 2026Article
- Individual-Level Trends in Mammography Screening over 14 years: Results from an All-Payer Statewide Claims Database.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Unmasking Malignancy in Dense Breast Tissue (American College of Radiology Types C and D): A Biopsy-Proven Analysis of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Performance, Clinical Decision Dynamics, and Correlation with Histological Grade and Molecular Subtypes.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Finding the optimal recall rate in breast cancer screening: results from the ROCS study.European radiology · 2026Article
- Screening mammography: Any room for reading improvement without AI?European radiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Ten Healthcare Delivery Trends and Their Measurement and Methodological Implications for Cancer Health Services Research.Health services research · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Educational Videos in Encouraging Preferences for Guideline-Based Cancer Screening in Japan: Three-Arm Pseudorandomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Characterizing the salivary RNA landscape to identify potential diagnostic, prognostic, and follow-up biomarkers for breast cancer.Molecular oncology · 2026Article
- Breathprints for Breast Cancer: Evaluating a Non-Invasive Approach to BI-RADS 4 Risk Stratification in a Preliminary Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Connecting algorithmic fairness and fair outcomes in a sociotechnical simulation case study of AI-assisted healthcare.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Mammo-GAN-Assisted Deep Network Training Scheme for Lesion Detection.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Over-detection and over-surveillance in breast screening: current status and the potential for artificial intelligence optimisation.Insights into imaging · 2025Review
- Considerations and clinical utility of referral pathways for early detection of liver disease in at-risk populations.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Article
- Thirty years of population-based breast cancer screening in Iceland: a comparison of quality indicators and tumour characteristics between women aged 40-49 and 50-69 years.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- Ethical Considerations and Implications of Multi-Cancer Early Detection Screening: Reliability, Access and Cost to Test and Treat.Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees · 2025Article
- Deriving risk-adapted starting ages of breast cancer screening according to polygenic risk score.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Patient-Perceived Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Net Benefit of Surveillance: A Multicenter Survey Study.The American journal of gastroenterology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFalse-positive results on screening mammography may affect women's willingness to return for future screening.
objectiveTo evaluate the association between screening mammography results and the probability of subsequent screening.
designCohort study.
setting177 facilities participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). PATIENTS: 3 529 825 screening mammograms (3 184 482 true negatives and 345 343 false positives) performed from 2005 to 2017 among 1 053 672 women aged 40 to 73 years without a breast cancer diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS: Mammography results (true-negative result or false-positive recall with a recommendation for immediate additional imaging only, short-interval follow-up, or biopsy) from 1 or 2 screening mammograms. Absolute differences in the probability of returning for screening within 9 to 30 months of false-positive versus true-negative screening results were estimated, adjusting for race, ethnicity, age, time since last mammogram, BCSC registry, and clustering within women and facilities.
resultsWomen were more likely to return after a true-negative result (76.9% [95% CI, 75.1% to 78.6%]) than after a false-positive recall for additional imaging only (adjusted absolute difference, -1.9 percentage points [CI, -3.1 to -0.7 percentage points]), short-interval follow-up (-15.9 percentage points [CI, -19.7 to -12.0 percentage points]), or biopsy (-10.0 percentage points [CI, -14.2 to -5.9 percentage points]). Asian and Hispanic/Latinx women had the largest decreases in the probability of returning after a false positive with a recommendation for short-interval follow-up (-20 to -25 percentage points) or biopsy (-13 to -14 percentage points) versus a true negative. Among women with 2 screening mammograms within 5 years, a false-positive result on the second was associated with a decreased probability of returning for a third regardless of the first screening result. LIMITATION: Women could receive care at non-BCSC facilities.
conclusionWomen were less likely to return to screening after false-positive mammography results, especially with recommendations for short-interval follow-up or biopsy, raising concerns about continued participation in routine screening among these women at increased breast cancer risk. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.
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.