Literature DB >> 12888368

The influence of a false-positive mammogram on a woman's subsequent behaviour for detecting breast cancer.

C Lampic1, E Thurfjell, P-O Sjödén.   

Abstract

The aim was to investigate the influence of undergoing further examinations due to a false-positive mammogram on women's re-attendance at the next scheduled screening and their frequency of breast self-examination (BSE). Study participants included 517 women (62% response) recalled due to findings on screening mammograms indicating possible malignancies, and a matched control group of 285 women (68% response) with normal mammograms. Participants completed five and three questionnaires, respectively, during the 2 years following screening participation. While the groups did not differ significantly in screening re-attendance, women recalled due to false-positive mammograms reported significantly higher levels of anxiety related to the next screening than did women with normal mammograms. At the 1-year assessment, women with false-positive mammograms reported a significantly higher frequency of BSE than did women with normal mammograms. The present results indicate that being recalled due to a false-positive mammogram does not seem to negatively affect screening re-attendance, and may have a positive impact on BSE.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12888368     DOI: 10.1016/s0959-8049(02)00451-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  14 in total

1.  Retention of screened women in the Manitoba Breast Screening Program.

Authors:  Kathleen M Decker
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2008 May-Jun

2.  Perspectives on mammography after receipt of secondary screening owing to a false positive.

Authors:  Maria D Thomson; Laura A Siminoff
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2015-01-31

3.  Discrepant screening mammography assessments at blinded and non-blinded double reading: impact of arbitration by a third reader on screening outcome.

Authors:  Elisabeth G Klompenhouwer; Adri C Voogd; Gerard J den Heeten; Luc J A Strobbe; Vivianne C Tjan-Heijnen; Mireille J M Broeders; Lucien E M Duijm
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Impact of a False-Positive Screening Mammogram on Subsequent Screening Behavior and Stage at Breast Cancer Diagnosis.

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

5.  False positive mammograms in Europe: do they affect reattendance?

Authors:  Talya Salz; Jessica T DeFrank; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Influence of false-positive mammography results on subsequent screening: do physician recommendations buffer negative effects?

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

7.  Opinions of women with high inherited breast cancer risk about prophylactic mastectomy: an initial evaluation from a screening trial including magnetic resonance imaging and ductal lavage.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Anne-Renee Hartman; Meredith A Mills; James M Ford; Bruce L Daniel; Sylvia K Plevritis
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  False-positive results in the randomized controlled trial of mammographic screening from age 40 ("Age" trial).

Authors:  Louise E Johns; Sue M Moss
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Breast cancer risk prediction and mammography biopsy decisions: a model-based study.

Authors:  Katrina Armstrong; Elizabeth A Handorf; Jinbo Chen; Mirar N Bristol Demeter
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 5.043

10.  Cumulative false positive recall rate and association with participant related factors in a population based breast cancer screening programme.

Authors:  Xavier Castells; Eduard Molins; Francesc Macià
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.710

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.