Literature DB >> 9012723

The review of randomization in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Is the debate over?

N F Boyd.   

Abstract

The randomization procedure in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (NBSS) is assessed in this issue (see pages 193 to 199) by Drs. John C. Bailar III and Brian MacMahon. They conclude that although there was ample opportunity for the randomization process to be subverted, no evidence of subversion was found. This is unlikely to allay all concerns about randomization, because there are still puzzling differences between the arms of the NBSS in a number of baseline variables. For example, the existence of prior health claims for breast cancer for women who entered the NBSS in Manitoba has raised the possibility that subversion occurred. Although the question may never be resolved, one lesion is clear: randomization in clinical trials should be managed in a manner that makes subversion impossible. As for the clinical implications of the NBSS for women in their 40s, physicians may now look to the results of randomized trials that have been published more recently. A meta-analysis of these results suggests that screening mammography reduces deaths from breast cancer among women in their 40s, but continued follow-up over the next few years will be needed to settle the debate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9012723      PMCID: PMC1226910     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  6 in total

1.  Point: Mammography screening-sticking to the science.

Authors:  M J Yaffe
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Breast cancer screening policy-good science should trump bad politics.

Authors:  M J Yaffe
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Marrying Story with Science: The Impact of Outdated and Inconsistent Breast Cancer Screening Practices in Canada.

Authors:  Jennie Dale; Michelle Di Tomaso; Victoria Gay
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 3.109

4.  Conclusions for mammography screening after 25-year follow-up of the Canadian National Breast Cancer Screening Study (CNBSS).

Authors:  S H Heywang-Köbrunner; I Schreer; A Hacker; M R Noftz; A Katalinic
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  The randomized trial of mammography screening that was not-A cautionary tale.

Authors:  Martin J Yaffe; Jean M Seely; Paula B Gordon; Shushiela Appavoo; Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 6.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

Authors:  Peter C Gøtzsche; Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-06-04
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.