The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mammography screening reduces rates of advanced and fatal breast cancers: Results in 549,091 women
Open accessAbstract
Background: It is of paramount importance to evaluate the impact of participation in organized mammography service screening independently from changes in breast cancer treatment. This can be done by measuring the incidence of fatal breast cancer, which is based on the date of diagnosis and not on the date of death. Methods: Among 549,091 women, covering approximately 30% of the Swedish screening‐eligible population, the authors calculated the incidence rates of 2473 breast cancers that were fatal within 10 years after diagnosis and the incidence rates of 9737 advanced breast cancers. Data regarding each breast cancer diagnosis and the cause and date of death of each breast cancer case were gathered from national Swedish registries. Tumor characteristics were collected from regional cancer centers. Aggregated data concerning invitation and participation were provided by Sectra Medical Systems AB. Incidence rates were analyzed using Poisson regression. Results: Women who participated in mammography screening had a statistically significant 41% reduction in their risk of dying of breast cancer within 10 years (relative risk, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.51‐0.68 [ P < .001]) and a 25% reduction in the rate of advanced breast cancers (relative risk, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66‐0.84 [ P < .001]). Conclusions: Substantial reductions in the incidence rate of breast cancers that were fatal within 10 years after diagnosis and in the advanced breast cancer rate were found in this contemporaneous comparison of women participating versus those not participating in screening. These benefits appeared to be independent of recent changes in treatment regimens.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume II – The Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies
Juul, S. (1989) · Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine · doi:10.1177/140349488901700214 · Cited by 3,592
Statistical methods in cancer research. Volume II--The design and analysis of cohort studies.
Breslow, N. E., & Day, N. E. (1987) · PubMed · Cited by 1,684
Tabár, L., Vitak, B., Chen, T. H.-H., Yen, A. M.-F., Cohen, A., Tot, T., Chiu, S. Y.-H., Chen, S. L.-S., Fann, J. C.-Y., Rosell, J., et al. (2011) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.11110469 · Cited by 791
Self-citationEffect of Screening Mammography on Breast-Cancer Mortality in Norway
Kalager, M., Zelen, M., Langmark, F., & Adami, H.-O. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1000727 · Cited by 526
Saadatmand, S., Bretveld, R., Siesling, S., & Tilanus-Linthorst, M. M. A. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.h4901 · Cited by 337
The Swedish Organised Service Screening Evaluation Group (2006) · Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-05-0349 · Cited by 258
Tabár, L., Dean, P. B., Chen, T. H., Yen, A. M., Chen, S. L., Fann, J. C., Chiu, S. Y., Ku, M. M., Wu, W. Y., Hsu, C., et al. (2019) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.31840 · Cited by 246
Self-citationNjor, S., Nyström, L., Moss, S., Paci, E., Broeders, M., Segnan, N., & Lynge, E. (2012) · Journal of Medical Screening · doi:10.1258/jms.2012.012080 · Cited by 185
Advanced breast cancer incidence following population-based mammographic screening
Autier, P., Boniol, M., Middleton, R., Doré, J., Héry, C., Zheng, T., & Gavin, A. (2011) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq633 · Cited by 126
Correcting for Non-Compliance Bias in Case–Control Studies to Evaluate Cancer Screening Programmes
Duffy, S. W., Cuzick, J. M., Tabár, L. K., et al. (2002) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · doi:10.1111/1467-9876.00266 · Cited by 124
Self-citation
Cited by
Ogier du Terrail, J., Leopold, A., Joly, C., Béguier, C., Andreux, M., Maussion, C., Schmauch, B., Tramel, E. W., Bendjebbar, E., Zaslavskiy, M., et al. (2023) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-022-02155-w · Cited by 217
Association between risk factors and major cancers: explainable machine learning approach
Huang, X., Ren, S., Mao, X., Chen, S., Chen, E., He, Y., & Jiang, Y. (2025) · JMIR Cancer · doi:10.2196/62833 · Cited by 6
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Duffy, S. W., Tabár, L., Yen, A. M., Dean, P. B., Smith, R. A., Jonsson, H., Törnberg, S., Chen, S. L., Chiu, S. Y., Fann, J. C., Ku, M. M., Wu, W. Y., Hsu, C., Chen, Y., Svane, G., Azavedo, E., Grundström, H., Sundén, P., Leifland, K., Frodis, E., Ramos, J., Epstein, B., Åkerlund, A., Sundbom, A., Bordás, P., Wallin, H., Starck, L., Björkgren, A., Carlson, S., Fredriksson, I., Ahlgren, J., Öhman, D., Holmberg, L., & Chen, T. H.
- Venue
- Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-05-11
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 2971-2979
- ISSN
- 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0142
- OpenAlex
- W3020983734
- Cited by
- 412
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 14.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mammography screening reduces rates of advanced and fatal breast cancers: Results in 549,091 women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.32859
- The paper
- Duffy, S. W., Tabár, L., Yen, A. M., Dean, P. B., Smith, R. A., Jonsson, H., Törnberg, S., Chen, S. L., Chiu, S. Y., Fann, J. C., Ku, M. M., Wu, W. Y., Hsu, C., Chen, Y., Svane, G., Azavedo, E., Grundström, H., Sundén, P., Leifland, K., . . . Chen, T. H. (2020). Mammography screening reduces rates of advanced and fatal breast cancers: Results in 549,091 women. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.32859
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.