OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study was to provide a simple estimate of the cumulative risk of a false-positive test for women participating in mammography screening. To test the method, we used data from two well-established, organized mammography screening programmes offering biennial screening to women aged 50-69 years in Copenhagen and Fyn, Denmark. METHODS: We defined the outcome from a screen as being either a false-positive test or not a false-positive test. We then tested whether the outcomes from subsequent screens were independent, and afterwards estimated the risk over 10 screens of a false-positive test, i.e. the risk of getting at least one false-positive test for a woman participating in all 10 screens typically offered in Europe. RESULTS: The outcomes of subsequent screens were found to be independent. After completion of screening rounds 3-5, the risk of a false-positive test over 10 screens was predicted to be 15.8-21.5% for a woman participating in the programme in Copenhagen, and 8.1-9.6% for a woman participating in the programme in Fyn. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that a relatively robust prediction of the risk of a false-positive test over 10 screens can be calculated in a simple way relatively early after the start of a mammography screening programme.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study was to provide a simple estimate of the cumulative risk of a false-positive test for women participating in mammography screening. To test the method, we used data from two well-established, organized mammography screening programmes offering biennial screening to women aged 50-69 years in Copenhagen and Fyn, Denmark. METHODS: We defined the outcome from a screen as being either a false-positive test or not a false-positive test. We then tested whether the outcomes from subsequent screens were independent, and afterwards estimated the risk over 10 screens of a false-positive test, i.e. the risk of getting at least one false-positive test for a woman participating in all 10 screens typically offered in Europe. RESULTS: The outcomes of subsequent screens were found to be independent. After completion of screening rounds 3-5, the risk of a false-positive test over 10 screens was predicted to be 15.8-21.5% for a woman participating in the programme in Copenhagen, and 8.1-9.6% for a woman participating in the programme in Fyn. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that a relatively robust prediction of the risk of a false-positive test over 10 screens can be calculated in a simple way relatively early after the start of a mammography screening programme.
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
Authors: Stephen H Taplin; L Abraham; B M Geller; B C Yankaskas; D S M Buist; R Smith-Bindman; C Lehman; D Weaver; P A Carney; W E Barlow Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-07-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Katja Kemp Jacobsen; Linn Abraham; Diana S M Buist; Rebecca A Hubbard; Ellen S O'Meara; Brian L Sprague; Karla Kerlikowske; Ilse Vejborg; My Von Euler-Chelpin; Sisse Helle Njor Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2015-05-23 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Jennifer Miller Croswell; Barnett S Kramer; Aimee R Kreimer; Phil C Prorok; Jian-Lun Xu; Stuart G Baker; Richard Fagerstrom; Thomas L Riley; Jonathan D Clapp; Christine D Berg; John K Gohagan; Gerald L Andriole; David Chia; Timothy R Church; E David Crawford; Mona N Fouad; Edward P Gelmann; Lois Lamerato; Douglas J Reding; Robert E Schoen Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2009 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166