Literature DB >> 15341987

Process indicators from ten centres in the Finnish breast cancer screening programme from 1991 to 2000.

T Sarkeala1, A Anttila, H Forsman, T Luostarinen, I Saarenmaa, M Hakama.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of the Finnish mammography programme by assessing process indicators from 10 screening centres using data from the first and subsequent screens. We compared these screen-specific indicators with European standards and results from countries with similar screening protocols. Ten Finnish centres invited approximately 1,000,000 women from 1991-2000. Women were mainly 50-64 years old. Mean compliance amongst this age group was 90% at the first and 93% at subsequent screens. The corresponding recall rates were 4.6% and 2.3%, respectively. The average breast cancer detection rates were 0.44% and 0.36%, respectively. The positive predictive values (PPVs) of mammography at the first and subsequent screens were 10% (range 7-20%) and 16% (range 12-31%), and the corresponding benign to malignant (B:M) biopsy ratios were 1:1 (range 0.5-1.8:1) and 0.4:1 (range 0.3-0.8:1). The PPV of mammography increased significantly during the study period, and the average process indicators fulfilled the criteria of the European community for the most part. However, the variation in PPVs was wide, as has been seen for other European mammography programmes, indicating meaningful differences in diagnostic criteria and potential adverse effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15341987     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2004.06.017

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


  11 in total

1.  Breast cancer screening in the Czech Republic: time trends in performance indicators during the first seven years of the organised programme.

Authors:  Ondrej Majek; Jan Danes; Miroslava Skovajsova; Helena Bartonkova; Lucie Buresova; Daniel Klimes; Petr Brabec; Pavel Kozeny; Ladislav Dusek
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 3.295

2.  The introduction of a breast cancer screening programme in a region with a population at medium risk for developing breast cancer: Khanty-Mansiysky autonomous Okrug-Ugra (Russian Federation).

Authors:  N Zakharova; Sw Duffy; J Mackay; E Kotlyarov
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2011-02-14

3.  Beyond mammography screening: quality assurance in breast cancer diagnosis (The QuaMaDi Project).

Authors:  A Katalinic; C Bartel; H Raspe; I Schreer
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2006-12-19       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  Overdiagnosis due to breast cancer screening: updated estimates of the Helsinki service study in Finland.

Authors:  S Heinävaara; T Sarkeala; A Anttila
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Evaluation of extension of breast screening to women aged 65-70 in England using screening performance measures.

Authors:  R L Bennett; R G Blanks; S M Moss
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-03-10       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Mammography-based screening program: preliminary results from a first 2-year round in a Brazilian region using mobile and fixed units.

Authors:  Raphael Luiz Haikel; Edmundo Carvalho Mauad; Thiago Buosi Silva; Jacó Saraiva de Castro Mattos; Luciano Fernandes Chala; Adhemar Longatto-Filho; Nestor de Barros
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2012-10-02       Impact factor: 2.809

7.  Use of private gynaecologist does not relate to better prevention outcomes - an ecological analysis from Finland.

Authors:  Elina Hemminki; Tiina Sevon; Kati Tanninen; Eero Pukkala; Ahti Anttila
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-03-06       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Impacts of the Finnish service screening programme on breast cancer rates.

Authors:  Ahti Anttila; Tytti Sarkeala; Timo Hakulinen; Sirpa Heinävaara
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2008-01-28       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Breast cancer mortality with varying invitational policies in organised mammography.

Authors:  T Sarkeala; S Heinävaara; A Anttila
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-01-29       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  An Example of Breast Cancer Regression on Imaging.

Authors:  Elizabeth S Burnside; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Frederick Kelcz; Jannette Collins
Journal:  Radiol Case Rep       Date:  2015-11-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.