ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2025
Downstream healthcare use following breast cancer screening: a register-based cohort study.
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychosocial Impact of Breast Density Notification Through Breast Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Interview Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor evaluation of breast cancer screening and informed prioritisation, it is important to examine the downstream healthcare use associated to participation. The objective of this study is to determine the healthcare use among breast cancer screening participants compared with screening-naïve controls.
methodsThe study is a register-based cohort study with 14 years of follow-up. We compare healthcare use among women who participated in the initial phase of the stepwise breast cancer screening implementation in Denmark (stratified on screening result: normal, false positive and breast cancer) compared with those invited in subsequent phases.
resultsScreening participants, especially those with false-positive results, tended to use primary healthcare services more than the screening-naïve group. Women with breast cancer and false positives received more breast imaging compared with the screening-naïve group. False positives consistently had the highest use of drugs compared with the control group. All screening groups had significantly higher use of outpatient clinic visits in the year of and following screening compared with the screening-naïve group. Screening groups were more likely to receive additional diagnoses in the years following screening than the screening-naïve group. There were no significant differences in medical procedures and days of hospitalisation.
conclusionsThe study highlights differences in primary healthcare use among screening groups compared with the screening-naïve group. Since use of primary care services is at the discretion of the women, this implies increased worries about health. Thus, these results indicate increased healthcare-seeking behaviour, especially among women with false-positive results.
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.