Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Mammography screening].

Authors: Marcel, Zwahlen; Matthias, Egger;

[Mammography screening].

Abstract

Breast cancer screening using mammography is one of the few screening interventions that have been assessed in several large randomized controlled studies (RCTs). Results from eight RCTs are available and have been summarized in several systematic reviews and meta-analyses, most of which conclude that mammography screening achieve a relative reduction in breast cancer mortality of 20 %. In the Swiss context this translates to one prevented breast cancer death over 10 years among 1000 women who start biannual mammography screening at age 50. However, mammography screening leads to the detection of cancers that would never have been found were it not for the screening (overdiagnosis). Screening thus increases the incidence of breast cancer, by about 20 %, which in turn leads to more therapies (surgery, radiation and chemotherapy). Over ten years after starting mammography at age 50, four additional women out of 1000 will be diagnosed with breast cancer. Without screening, these women would not have had a diagnosis. Over the same ten years (five screening rounds), about one in five women will have at least one mammography result which requires further diagnostic workup. Furthermore, even when mammography screening is implemented, 20 to 30 % breast cancer patients will not be diagnosed by the screening but between screening rounds. The information and knowledge of the population about benefits and harms of mammography screening is inadequate in that the benefits are overestimated and the harms underestimated. The female population needs to be better informed on both these aspects of mammography screening. Women have a right to receive adequate evidence-based information in order to make an informed decision whether to attend mammography screening.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Evidence-Based Medicine, Humans, Mass Screening, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Mammography

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    2
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
2
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!