Literature DB >> 16547835

Women's patterns of participation in mammography screening in Denmark.

My von Euler-Chelpin1, Anne Helene Olsen, Sisse Njor, Ilse Vejborg, Walter Schwartz, Elsebeth Lynge.   

Abstract

The objective of the study is to analyse individual women's participation patterns in mammography screening in Denmark. The study is set in the capital of Copenhagen and the county of Fyn representing around 95,000 women aged 50-69. The Central Population Register (CPR) was used to define the total target group, and supply information on migrations and deaths. Invitation and participation data came from the mammography screening programmes in Copenhagen (1991-1999) and Fyn (1993-2001), containing personal identification number, data on invitation date, participation and examination date for each screening round. In Copenhagen the coverage went from 70.5% in the first round to 63.1% in the fourth round, and the equivalent data for Fyn is 84.6% in the first round and 82.8% in the fourth round. Of the women eligible for at least three invitation rounds, 52.6% in Copenhagen and 76.4% in Fyn were faithful users, i.e. had participated in all screenings they were invited to. The conclusion is that the programme participation rates tend to overestimate the protection of the individual women covered by the programme. Behind the urban-rural gradient in programme participation is an even greater gradient in programme protection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16547835     DOI: 10.1007/s10654-006-0002-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0393-2990            Impact factor:   8.082


  29 in total

1.  Breast cancer screening and management.

Authors:  A P Forrest; E D Anderson
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1999-11-01       Impact factor: 7.738

2.  Predictors of mammography use among Canadian women aged 50-69: findings from the 1996/97 National Population Health Survey.

Authors:  C J Maxwell; C M Bancej; J Snider
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-02-06       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Estimating the influence of rescreening interval on the benefits associated with cancer screening: approaches and limitations.

Authors:  Noel S Weiss; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  The pattern of breast cancer screening utilization and its consequences.

Authors:  James Michaelson; Sameer Satija; Richard Moore; Griffin Weber; Elkan Halpern; Andrew Garland; Dhruv Puri; Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-01-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Breast cancer mortality in Copenhagen after introduction of mammography screening: cohort study.

Authors:  Anne Helene Olsen; Sisse H Njor; Ilse Vejborg; Walter Schwartz; Peter Dalgaard; Maj-Britt Jensen; Ulla Brix Tange; Mogens Blichert-Toft; Fritz Rank; Henning Mouridsen; Elsebeth Lynge
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-01-13

6.  Mammography facility characteristics and repeat mammography use among Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Kimberly K Engelman; Edward F Ellerbeck; Matthew S Mayo; Samuel J Markello; Jasjit S Ahluwalia
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Population-based mammography screening in Swedish clinical practice: prevalence and incidence screening in Uppsala County.

Authors:  E L Thurfjell; J A Lindgren
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Programme sensitivity and effectiveness of mammography service screening in Helsinki, Finland.

Authors:  A Anttila; J Koskela; M Hakama
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.136

9.  Decreasing women's anxieties after abnormal mammograms: a controlled trial.

Authors:  Mary B Barton; Debra S Morley; Sara Moore; Jennifer D Allen; Ken P Kleinman; Karen M Emmons; Suzanne W Fletcher
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2004-04-07       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Diagnostic outcome of repeated mammography screening.

Authors:  L G Arnesson; B Vitak; J C Månson; G Fagerberg; S Smeds
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1995 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.352

View more
  11 in total

1.  Socioeconomic status as determinant for participation in mammography screening: assessing the difference between using women's own versus their partner's.

Authors:  Malin Kjellén; My von Euler-Chelpin
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 3.380

2.  Breast cancer mortality in organised mammography screening in Denmark: comparative study.

Authors:  Karsten Juhl Jørgensen; Per-Henrik Zahl; Peter C Gøtzsche
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

3.  Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study.

Authors:  Karsten J Jørgensen; Per-Henrik Zahl; Peter C Gøtzsche
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2009-12-22       Impact factor: 2.809

4.  Urban-rural differences in a population-based breast cancer screening program in Croatia.

Authors:  Valerija Stamenić; Marija Strnad
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.351

5.  Should breast cancer survivors be excluded from, or invited to, organised mammography screening programmes?

Authors:  Lauro Bucchi
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  Body mass index and participation in organized mammographic screening: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Sophie Sell Hellmann; Sisse Helle Njor; Elsebeth Lynge; My von Euler-Chelpin; Anja Olsen; Anne Tjønneland; Ilse Vejborg; Zorana Jovanovic Andersen
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Breast density and outcome of mammography screening: a cohort study.

Authors:  A H Olsen; K Bihrmann; M-B Jensen; I Vejborg; E Lynge
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Mammographic density in birth cohorts of Danish women: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Sophie Sell Hellmann; Elsebeth Lynge; Walter Schwartz; Ilse Vejborg; Sisse Helle Njor
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Recommendations for breast imaging follow-up of women with a previous history of breast cancer: position paper from the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa) and the Italian College of Breast Radiologists (ICBR) by SIRM.

Authors:  Lauro Bucchi; Paolo Belli; Eva Benelli; Daniela Bernardi; Beniamino Brancato; Massimo Calabrese; Luca A Carbonaro; Francesca Caumo; Beatrice Cavallo-Marincola; Paola Clauser; Chiara Fedato; Alfonso Frigerio; Vania Galli; Livia Giordano; Paola Golinelli; Giovanna Mariscotti; Laura Martincich; Stefania Montemezzi; Doralba Morrone; Carlo Naldoni; Adriana Paduos; Pietro Panizza; Federica Pediconi; Fiammetta Querci; Antonio Rizzo; Gianni Saguatti; Alberto Tagliafico; Rubina M Trimboli; Chiara Zuiani; Francesco Sardanelli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 3.469

10.  Breast cancer mortality and overdiagnosis after implementation of population-based screening in Denmark.

Authors:  Elsebeth Lynge; Anna-Belle Beau; My von Euler-Chelpin; George Napolitano; Sisse Njor; Anne Helene Olsen; Walter Schwartz; Ilse Vejborg
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-08-30       Impact factor: 4.872

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.