ArticleClinical epidemiology2025
Self-Selection Bias in Randomized and Observational Studies on Screening Mammography: A Quantitative Assessment.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community-based chest X-ray screening versus symptom-based case presentation in the elderly: evidence from three consecutive years of data.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Breast cancer mortality among women who have attended BreastScreen Norway, 1996-2023.Breast cancer research : BCR · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Observational studies aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of screening mammography are prone to self-selection due to differences in personal characteristics between women attending and those not attending screening. A method based on a quantity Objective: To estimate the amount of self-selection in observational studies aimed at evaluating screening mammography effectiveness and to estimate Methods: A first step quantified self-selection and Results: The self-selection bias was 2.10 in Swedish trials. Self-selection in cohort studies was computed as (0.98/0.54) = 1.78. The Conclusion: Compared to women attending screening, the risk of breast cancer death was approximately two times greater in women not attending screening. This increased risk was independent of screening effects. Most observational studies have overestimated the effectiveness of screening mammography because they used
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.