ArticleKorean journal of radiology2025
Biennial Mammography Performance in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program From 2009 to 2020.
Article in Korean journal of radiology, 2025. 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.
- Breast Cancer Screening Programs in China: Implementation, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Evaluation of a National Breast Cancer Screening Program in a Middle-Income Country: The Case of Kazakhstan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Supplemental automated breast ultrasound in negative screening mammography: early-stage cancer detection in dense breasts with limited yield in non-dense breasts.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2026Article
- Breast Cancer Screening in Asian Countries: Epidemiology, Screening Practices, Outcomes, Challenges, and Future Directions.Korean journal of radiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMammography is essential for reducing breast cancer mortality; however, its performance varies globally. This study aimed to evaluate mammography screening outcomes in Korea over 12 years and investigate regional variations. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe analyzed mammography data from 42 million Korean women, aged 40 years and older, who participated in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) from 2009 to 2020. Performance metrics-including recall rate (RR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), cancer detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), and dense breast rate (DBR), were computed. Twelve-year trends in these metrics were analyzed using Joinpoint regression. Regional variations were also examined across Korea's 237 districts, stratified by age groups.
resultsFrom 2009 to 2020, 42165405 mammography screenings were conducted through the KNCSP, increasing from 2821132 screenings in 2009 to 3596204 in 2020. The RR decreased from 17.2% in 2009 to 11.2% in 2020 (average annual percent change [AAPC] = -3.7%), while the PPV increased from 0.8% to 2.8%; AAPC = 10.7%), the CDR increased from 1.5 to 3.1 per 1000; AAPC = 7.3%), and the ICR rose from 0.9 to 1.6 per 1000; (AAPC = 5.2%). Regional variations were noted; however, differences in the RR, sensitivity, specificity, and FPR decreased over time.
conclusionWhile mammography performance improved from 2009 to 2020, the PPV and sensitivity remain suboptimal, underscoring the need for continuous monitoring. Regional disparities in performance, although reduced, persist. These findings provide essential baseline data for improving mammography quality and addressing inequities in breast cancer screening.
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.