Literature DB >> 3406395

Induced costs of low-cost screening mammography.

D Cyrlak1.   

Abstract

Telephone follow-up in a recent low-cost ($50) mammography screening project in Orange County, California, was done to determine the detection rate and the induced costs of detection of small breast cancers. Because 403 of 2,261 (18%) women screened required additional evaluation and the cost of evaluation per abnormal mammogram averaged $607, the actual cost per cancer detected was $25,500. At least five cancers were detected per 1,000 women screened, and only 17% of the cancers involved the axillary lymph nodes. The costs of screening mammograms accounted for less than one-third of total costs, with surgical consultations and biopsies for benign disease representing the major induced costs of screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3406395     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.168.3.3406395

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  11 in total

1.  Computer-aided classification of breast masses: performance and interobserver variability of expert radiologists versus residents.

Authors:  Swatee Singh; Jeff Maxwell; Jay A Baker; Jennifer L Nicholas; Joseph Y Lo
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-10-22       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Experience with indeterminate mammograms.

Authors:  P De Neef; J Gandara
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1991-01

3.  Optimal Policies for Reducing Unnecessary Follow-up Mammography Exams in Breast Cancer Diagnosis.

Authors:  Oguzhan Alagoz; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Decis Anal       Date:  2013-09

4.  Impact of core-needle breast biopsy on the surgical management of mammographic abnormalities.

Authors:  R R White; T J Halperin; J A Olson ; M S Soo; R C Bentley; H F Seigler
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  A model of the influence of false-positive mammography screening results on subsequent screening.

Authors:  Jessica T Defrank; Noel Brewer
Journal:  Health Psychol Rev       Date:  2010

6.  Mammographically detected breast cancer. Benefits of stereotactic core versus wire localization biopsy.

Authors:  J H Yim; P Barton; B Weber; D Radford; J Levy; B Monsees; F Flanagan; J A Norton; G M Doherty
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 7.  When can stereotactic core biopsy replace excisional biopsy?--A clinical perspective.

Authors:  M Morrow
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  The danger of applying uniform clinical policies across populations: the case of breast cancer in American Indians.

Authors:  P A Nutting; B N Calonge; D C Iverson; L A Green
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  International variation in screening mammography interpretations in community-based programs.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Connie Y Nakano; Thomas D Koepsell; Laurel M Desnick; Carl J D'Orsi; David F Ransohoff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-09-17       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Diagnostic accuracy of large-core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast disease: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  H M Verkooijen; P H Peeters; E Buskens; V C Koot; I H Borel Rinkes; W P Mali; T J van Vroonhoven
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.