False-positive result and reattendance in the Ontario Breast Screening Program

Journal of Medical Screening

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 129-133

  Chiarelli, A M ^a,b   Moravan, V ^c   Halapy, E ^d   Majpruz, V ^d   Mai, V ^b   Tatla, R K ^d  

^a Ontario Breast Screening Program   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

^d CANCER CARE ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; BREAST SCREENING PROGRAM; CANADA; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTEGRATION; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MASS SCREENING; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCREENING; SURVIVAL; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS;

AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COHORT STUDIES; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; ONTARIO; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT REFUSAL;

EID: 0043190874     PISSN: 09691413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/096914103769011021     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC). Canadian Cancer Statistics 2001. Toronto: National Cancer Institute of Canada, 2001.
2. Chiarelli AM, Theis B, Holowaty E, et al. Breast Cancer in Ontario, 1971-1996. Toronto: Cancer Care Ontario, 2000.
3. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, et al. Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. JAMA 1995;273:149-54.
4. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BKS, et al. Breast cancer screening: A summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:347-60.
5. Lipskie TL. A summary of cancer screening guidelines. Chronic Dis Can 1998;19:112-30.
6. Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, et al. Ten to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1982;69:349-55.
7. Tabar L, Gad A, Holmberg LH, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: randomized trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Work Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985;i:829-32.
8. Johnson M, Hislop TG, Kan L, et al. Compliance with the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia: will she return? Can J Public Health 1996;87:176-80.
9. Scaf-Klomp W, van Sonderen FLP, Stewart R, et al. Compliance after 17 years of breast cancer screening. J Med Screen 1995;2:195-9.
10. Cockburn J, Schofield P, White V, et al. Predictors of returning for second round screening at a population based mammographic screening program in Melbourne, Australia. J Epidemiol Community Health 1997;51:62-6.
11. Rodriguez C, Plasencia A, Schroeder DG. Predictive factors of enrollment and adherence in a breast cancer screening program in Barcelona (Spain). Soc Sci Med 1995;40:1155-60.
12. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, et al. Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med 199B;338:1089-146.
13. Rimer BK, Bluman LG. The psychosocial consequences of mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1997;22:131-8.
14. Brett J, Austoker J, Ong G. Do women who undergo further investigation for breast screening suffer adverse psychological consequences? A multicentre follow-up study comparing different breast screening result groups five months after their last breast screening appointment. J Public Health Med 1998;20:396-403.
15. Brett J, Austoker J. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting reattendance. J Public Health Med 2001;23:292-300.
16. O'Sullivan I, Sutton S, Dixon S, et al. False positive results do not have a negative effect on reattendance for subsequent breast screening. J Med Screen 2001;8:145-8.
17. Burman ML, Taplin SH, Herta DF, et al. Effect of false-positive mammogram in interval breast cancer screening in a health maintenance organization. Ann Intern Med 1999;131:1-6.
18. Ballard-Barbash R, Klabunde C, Paci E, et al. Breast cancer screening in 21 countries: delivery of services, notification of results and outcome ascertainment. Eur J Cancer Prev 1999;8:417-26.
19. Libsutg AR, Moravan V, Aitken SE. Results from the Ontario Breast Screening Program, 1990-1995. J Med Screen 1998;5:73-80.
20. Health Canada. Organized Breast Cancer Screening Programs in Canada. 1997 and 1998 Report. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2001.
21. Holowaty EJ, Marrett LD, Fehringer G. Cancer incidence in Ontario:Trends and regional variations in the 1980s. Toronto: Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation, 1995.
22. Marrett LD, Swift M, Reynolds DL, Clarke EA. Geographic distribution of cancer in Ontario, Volume 1: Atlas of cancer mortality, 1976-1985. Toronto: Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation, 1995.
23. MatchWare Technologies, Inc. AUTOMATCH, Version 4. User's Manual. Burtonsville, MD, USA: MatchWare Technologies, 1996.
24. Cox DR. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc B 1972;34:187-220.
25. SAS Institute. Statistical Analysis System (SAS) User's Guide, Basics. 5th edn. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 1990.
26. De Waard F, Collette HJA, Rombach JJ, et al. The DOM project for the early detection of breast cancer, Utrecht, The Netherlands. J Chron Dis 1984;37:1-44.
27. Statistics Canada. Annual demographic statistics 1998. Ottawa: Ministry of Industry, 1999.
28. Murray-Sykes K. Organizing assessment. National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Breast Screen Publications, Sheffield: UK, 1989.
29. Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health (CDHSH). National program for the early detection of breast cancer. National accreditation requirements. Australia: CDHSH, 1994.