Mammography

About: Mammography is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 20643 publications have been published within this topic receiving 513679 citations.

Sensitivity and specificity of first screen mammography in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a preliminary report from five centers.

Abstract: Sensitivity and specificity of first screen mammography in a randomized screening trial at five centers are reported. A total of 23,101 women underwent mammography; in 139, breast cancer was detected at first screening; in 20, less than 12 months after first screening; and in 47, at second screening. All 206 cancer cases were histologically confirmed, and 174 were defined as being detectable at first screening. Average length of follow-up for all women was 3.2 years. Interpretations of first screen mammograms by the center radiologists were matched to known outcomes. Simultaneous blind review was performed by a single reference radiologist with mammograms from all 206 cancer cases and those of a random sample of 739 women not known to have breast cancer at 15 months or more after initial screening. Overall, the five screening centers achieved a sensitivity of 69% (range, 60%-78%), a specificity of 94% (range, 93%-96%), a positive predictive value of 8.6% (range, 3%-16%), and a negative predictive value of 99.7% (range, 99.6%-99.9%).

Inadequate follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms: findings from the race differences in screening mammography process study (United States)*

Abstract: Objective Despite relatively high mammography screening rates, there are reports of inadequate follow-up of abnormal results. Our objective was to identify factors associated with inadequate follow-up, and specifically, to determine if this outcome differed by race/ethnicity.

Breast cancer screening knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Korean American women.

Abstract: Purpose/objectives To describe the knowledge and beliefs about breast cancer and breast cancer screening and practices of clinical breast examination (CBE) and mammography of Korean American women. Design Cross-sectional survey. Setting Two Korean churches in a mid-sized Southeastern U.S. city. Sample A convenience sample of 107 Korean women ages 40 and older. Methods Data were collected using Champion's Health Belief Model instrument (susceptibility, seriousness, benefits, and barriers) and the Breast Cancer Knowledge test through mailed questionnaires. Main research variables Knowledge and beliefs about breast cancer screening and practices of CBE and mammography. Findings The percentages of Korean American women who ever had a CBE and mammography were 67 and 58, respectively. Among the Health Belief Model variables, women who never had a CBE had significantly lower knowledge scores and higher perceived barriers to CBE than those who had. Women who never had a mammogram reported significantly higher perceived barriers to mammography. Logistic regression analyses demonstrated that husband's nationality, regular checkups, and encouragement from family members and physicians were significant predictors of CBE and mammography use. Conclusions The frequency of breast cancer screening practices among Korean American women is below national objectives. Implications for nursing practice As healthcare professionals in a culturally diverse nation, nurses need to increase their awareness of cultural variations and provide culturally and linguistically appropriate breast health education. Additional studies with women from a variety of settings are needed to validate present study findings.

Influence of Study Features and Methods on Overdiagnosis Estimates in Breast and Prostate Cancer Screening

Abstract: Knowledge of the likelihood that a screening-detected case of cancer has been overdiagnosed is vitally important to make treatment decisions and develop screening policy. An overdiagnosed case is an excess case detected by screening. Estimates of the frequency of overdiagnosis in breast and prostate cancer screening vary greatly across studies. This article identifies features of overdiagnosis studies that influence results and shows their effect by using published research. First, different ways to define and measure overdiagnosis are considered. Second, contextual features and how they affect overdiagnosis estimates are examined. Third, the effect of estimation approach is discussed. Many studies use excess incidence under screening as a proxy for overdiagnosis. Others use statistical models to make inferences about lead time or natural history and then derive the corresponding fraction of cases that are overdiagnosed. This article concludes with questions that readers of overdiagnosis studies can use to evaluate the validity and relevance of published estimates and recommends that authors of studies quantifying overdiagnosis provide information about these features.