The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Global guidelines for breast cancer screening: A systematic review
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: Breast cancer screening guidelines could provide valuable tools for clinical decision making by reviewing the available evidence and providing recommendations. Little information is known about how many countries have issued breast cancer screening guidelines and the differences among existing guidelines. We systematically reviewed current guidelines and summarized corresponding recommendations, to provide references for good clinical practice in different countries. METHODS: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to March 27th, 2021 were conducted and supplemented by reviewing the guideline development organizations. The quality of screening guidelines was assessed from six domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Ⅱ (AGREE Ⅱ) instrument by two appraisers. The basic information and recommendations of the issued guidelines were extracted and summarized. RESULTS: A total of 23 guidelines issued between 2010 and 2021 in 11 countries or regions were identified for further review. The content and quality varied across the guidelines. The average AGREE Ⅱ scores of the guidelines ranged from 33.3% to 87.5%. The highest domain score was "clarity of presentation" while the domain with the lowest score was "applicability". For average-risk women, most of the guidelines recommended mammographic screening for those aged 40-74 years, specifically, those aged 50-69 years were regarded as the optimal age group for screening. Nine of 23 guidelines recommended against an upper age limit for breast cancer screening. Mammography (MAM) was recommended as the primary screening modality for average-risk women by all included guidelines. Most guidelines suggested annual or biennial mammographic screening. Risk factors of breast cancer identified in the guidelines mainly fell within five categories which could be broadly summarized as the personal history of pre-cancerous lesions and/or breast cancer; the family history of breast cancer; the known genetic predisposition of breast cancer; the history of mantle or chest radiation therapy; and dense breasts. For women at higher risk, there was a consensus among most guidelines that annual MAM or annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be given, and the screening should begin earlier than the average-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of 23 included international guidelines were issued by developed countries which contained roughly the same but not identical recommendations on breast cancer screening age, methods, and intervals. Most guidelines recommended annual or biennial mammographic screening between 40 and 74 years for average-risk populations and annual MAM or annual MRI starting from a younger age for high-risk populations. Current guidelines varied in quality and increased efforts are needed to improve the methodological quality of guidance documents. Due to lacking clinical practice guidelines tailored to different economic levels, low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) should apply and implement the evidence-based guidelines with higher AGREE Ⅱ scores considering local adaption.
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
AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care
Brouwers, M. C., Kho, M. E., Browman, G. P., Burgers, J. S., Cluzeau, F., Feder, G., Fervers, B., Graham, I. D., Grimshaw, J., Hanna, S. E., et al. (2010) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.090449 · Cited by 3,790
Breast cancer statistics, 2019
DeSantis, C. E., Ma, J., Gaudet, M. M., Newman, L. A., Miller, K. D., Goding Sauer, A., Jemal, A., & Siegel, R. L. (2019) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21583 · Cited by 3,114
Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
Aebi, S., Davidson, T., Gruber, G., & Castiglione, M. (2010) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq159 · Cited by 2,842
Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
Cardoso, F., Kyriakides, S., Ohno, S., Penault-Llorca, F., Poortmans, P., Rubio, I. T., Zackrisson, S., & Senkus, E. (2019) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz173 · Cited by 2,214
Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement
Siu, A. L., & on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (2016) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m15-2886 · Cited by 2,094
Oeffinger, K. C., Fontham, E. T. H., Etzioni, R., Herzig, A., Michaelson, J. S., Shih, Y.-C. T., Walter, L. C., Church, T. R., Flowers, C. R., LaMonte, S. J., et al. (2015) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2015.12783 · Cited by 1,653
Breast Cancer, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Gradishar, W. J., Anderson, B. O., Abraham, J., Aft, R., Agnese, D., Allison, K. H., Blair, S. L., Burstein, H. J., Dang, C., Elias, A. D., et al. (2020) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2020.0016 · Cited by 1,584
Effect of Three Decades of Screening Mammography on Breast-Cancer Incidence
Bleyer, A., & Welch, H. G. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1206809 · Cited by 1,367
Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials
Nyström, L., Andersson, I., Bjurstam, N., Frisell, J., Nordenskjöld, B., & Rutqvist, L. E. (2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08020-0 · Cited by 1,183
Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: Recommendations from the EUSOMA working group
Sardanelli, F., Boetes, C., Borisch, B., Decker, T., Federico, M., Gilbert, F. J., Helbich, T., Heywang-Köbrunner, S. H., Kaiser, W. A., Kerin, M. J., et al. (2010) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015 · Cited by 992
Cited by
Jost, E., Kosian, P., Jimenez Cruz, J., Albarqouni, S., Gembruch, U., Strizek, B., & Recker, F. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm12216833 · Cited by 44
“Especially in women with dense breast tissue, e.g., predominantly in young women or in Asian ethnicity, and for underserved areas, US diagnostics and screening are crucial [196].”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Ren, W., Chen, M., Qiao, Y., & Zhao, F.
- Venue
- The Breast
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-08
- Volume
- 64
- Pages
- 85-99
- ISSN
- 0960-9776 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4224218755
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 49
- FWCI
- 11.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Global guidelines for breast cancer screening: A systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.breast.2022.04.003
- The paper
- Ren, W., Chen, M., Qiao, Y., & Zhao, F. (2022). Global guidelines for breast cancer screening: A systematic review. The Breast. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2022.04.003
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.