ArticleBMC cancer2026
Mammographic screening and time to breast cancer diagnosis among immigrants and long-term residents in Ontario.
Article in BMC cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiennial breast screening enables timely diagnosis, a critical determinant of survival. However, this benefit depends on navigating complex healthcare systems where immigrant women often encounter barriers. We posed the question of whether immigrant women in Ontario experience a “double burden” of lower screening adherence and prolonged intervals between clinical presentation and confirmed diagnosis compared to long-term residents.
methodsWe identified women aged 50–74 eligible for breast screening in provincial administrative databases. We calculated the proportion up-to-date with biennial mammography annually (2012–2020) and modelled the incidence rate ratio (IRR) using negative binomial regression, adjusting for age, marginalization, and morbidity. Additionally, we identified women with a first breast cancer diagnosis and matched each immigrant 1:2 to long-term residents by age, stage, and year of diagnosis. The time from first clinical presentation to diagnosis was analyzed using adjusted linear regression and conditional logistic regression.
resultsOn January 1, 2020, 59.9% of long-term residents were up-to-date with screening compared to 51.4% of immigrants (adjusted IRR 0.74; 95% CI 0.71–0.78). The adjusted mean time to diagnosis was 1.21 days longer for immigrants (95% CI 0.10–2.32), a clinically negligible difference. However, diagnostic delays were systemic: 25% of all women waited ≥ 60 days, and 10% waited ≥ 135 days, with no significant difference between groups. Immigrants were more likely to be diagnosed at Stage 2 or 3 compared to long-term residents (51.7% vs. 46.6%, p < 0.001).
conclusionComprehensive process mapping of screening and diagnostic processes is required involving representatives of all stakeholders and all subpopulations eligible for breast screening, in order to conduct and implement knowledge-based revisions of screening and BC diagnosis service delivery in Ontario, improve the uptake of screening and the BC stage distribution among immigrant women, and reduce lengthy diagnostic delays.
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.