I O'Sullivan1, S Sutton, S Dixon, N Perry. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, UK. ijosul@essex.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To find out whether a false positive breast screening result has a negative effect on subsequent screening attendance. Also considered was the proportion of women who had ever failed to reattend for screening, having previously attended routinely. DESIGN: The study was a retrospective cohort design. SETTING: Data from the call and recall records of the Central and East London Breast Screening Service (CELBSS) were used. PARTICIPANTS: Women who had been invited to attend for breast screening by the CELBSS during 1997. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subsequent attendance or non-attendance for the next routine breast screen, after a false positive screening result. RESULTS: A substantial number of women failed to reattend for a breast screen during their screening history, having attended for their previous routine breast screen. No differences in the rates of reattendance were found between those who had previously received a false positive result and those who had not. CONCLUSION: From the results obtained in the present study it would seem that the experience of a false positive breast screen does not deter women from reattending in the future. However, many women living in inner city areas who attend for an initial breast screen are failing to attend for subsequent routine mammograms. This may have a deleterious effect for these women in terms of the benefits of attendance for regular screening.
OBJECTIVES: To find out whether a false positive breast screening result has a negative effect on subsequent screening attendance. Also considered was the proportion of women who had ever failed to reattend for screening, having previously attended routinely. DESIGN: The study was a retrospective cohort design. SETTING: Data from the call and recall records of the Central and East London Breast Screening Service (CELBSS) were used. PARTICIPANTS: Women who had been invited to attend for breast screening by the CELBSS during 1997. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subsequent attendance or non-attendance for the next routine breast screen, after a false positive screening result. RESULTS: A substantial number of women failed to reattend for a breast screen during their screening history, having attended for their previous routine breast screen. No differences in the rates of reattendance were found between those who had previously received a false positive result and those who had not. CONCLUSION: From the results obtained in the present study it would seem that the experience of a false positive breast screen does not deter women from reattending in the future. However, many women living in inner city areas who attend for an initial breast screen are failing to attend for subsequent routine mammograms. This may have a deleterious effect for these women in terms of the benefits of attendance for regular screening.
Authors: Firas M Dabbous; Therese A Dolecek; Michael L Berbaum; Sarah M Friedewald; Wm Thomas Summerfelt; Kent Hoskins; Garth H Rauscher Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Jessica T DeFrank; Barbara K Rimer; J Michael Bowling; Jo Anne Earp; Erica S Breslau; Noel T Brewer Journal: J Med Screen Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 2.136