SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2025
The screening value of mammography for breast cancer: an overview of 28 systematic reviews with evidence mapping.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- The Effect of Breast Cancer and Breast Self-Examination Health Education on Awareness, Beliefs, and Practices of Female Students at the Faculty of Health Sciences of a University in Somalia.The breast journal · 2026Trial
- Evaluating artificial intelligence-generated synthesized mammography as a standalone alternative to digital mammography with or without tomosynthesis.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- European Cancer Prevention Organization on cancer screening: an expert panel position paper.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- Article
- WDCN: a comprehensive neural network based approach for estimating breast cancer risk.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Article
- Predictive value of elastography (Shear-Wave and Elasticity Index) in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions: a retrospective study in Peru.Radiology and oncology · 2026Observational
- Effective Implementation of Population Health Outreach to Increase Breast Cancer Screening.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- High Mammographic Density in Younger Women and Its Implications for Breast Cancer Subtypes.International journal of breast cancer · 2026Article
- Circular RNAs in Plasma and Beyond: Potential Biomarkers for Breast Cancer.Oncology research · 2026Review
- Automated Software Evaluation in Screening Mammography: A Scoping Review of Image Quality and Technique Assessment.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Factors influencing breast and cervical cancer screening among ever-married women aged 15-49 in Jordan: an analysis of the 2023 Jordan population and family health survey.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness of mammography screening in reducing breast cancer mortality and the accuracy of various mammography techniques have been widely studied. However, the quality and findings of existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses require comprehensive evaluation.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed for systematic reviews published up until December 20, 2022. A total of 28 systematic reviews with meta-analyses were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality using the Risk Of Bias In Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool.
resultsOf the 28 systematic reviews included, only 17.9% were rated as low risk of bias. The pooled estimates for breast cancer mortality reduction due to mammography screening ranged from 0.51 (95% CI 0.46-0.55) to 1.04 (95% CI 0.84-1.27). The results were influenced by study design, age, and follow-up duration, with an overall trend indicating that mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality. Sensitivity of mammography techniques ranged from 55 to 91%, and specificity from 84 to 97%. Digital breast tomosynthesis combined with synthetic contrast-enhanced spectral mammography, digital mammography, and film mammography demonstrated relatively high cancer detection rates and low false positives.
conclusionMammography screening appears effective in reducing breast cancer mortality. The accuracy of various mammography techniques is generally reliable, with certain combinations showing high detection rates. However, the methodological quality of most included reviews was at high risk of bias, indicating a need for higher-quality studies in the future.
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.