The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ten-Year Risk of False Positive Screening Mammograms and Clinical Breast Examinations
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The cumulative risk of a false positive result from a breast-cancer screening test is unknown. METHODS: We performed a 10-year retrospective cohort study of breast-cancer screening and diagnostic evaluations among 2400 women who were 40 to 69 years old at study entry. Mammograms or clinical breast examinations that were interpreted as indeterminate, aroused a suspicion of cancer, or prompted recommendations for additional workup in women in whom breast cancer was not diagnosed within the next year were considered to be false positive tests. RESULTS: A total of 9762 screening mammograms and 10,905 screening clinical breast examinations were performed, for a median of 4 mammograms and 5 clinical breast examinations per woman over the 10-year period. Of the women who were screened, 23.8 percent had at least one false positive mammogram, 13.4 percent had at least one false positive breast examination, and 31.7 percent had at least one false positive result for either test. The estimated cumulative risk of a false positive result was 49.1 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 40.3 to 64.1 percent) after 10 mammograms and 22.3 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 19.2 to 27.5 percent) after 10 clinical breast examinations. The false positive tests led to 870 outpatient appointments, 539 diagnostic mammograms, 186 ultrasound examinations, 188 biopsies, and 1 hospitalization. We estimate that among women who do not have breast cancer, 18.6 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 9.8 to 41.2 percent) will undergo a biopsy after 10 mammograms, and 6.2 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 3.7 to 11.2 percent) after 10 clinical breast examinations. For every 100 dollars spent for screening, an additional 33 dollars was spent to evaluate the false positive results. CONCLUSIONS: Over 10 years, one third of women screened had an abnormal test result that required additional evaluation, even though no breast cancer was present. Techniques are needed to decrease false positive results while maintaining high sensitivity. Physicians should educate women about the risk of a false positive result from a screening test for breast cancer.
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
Cited by
A view on drug resistance in cancer
Vasan, N., Baselga, J., & Hyman, D. M. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1730-1 · Cited by 2,770
Helping Doctors and Patients Make Sense of Health Statistics
Gigerenzer, G., Gaissmaier, W., Kurz-Milcke, E., Schwartz, L. M., & Woloshin, S. (2007) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6053.2008.00033.x · Cited by 1,336
Benign Breast Disease and the Risk of Breast Cancer
Hartmann, L. C., Sellers, T. A., Frost, M. H., Lingle, W. L., Degnim, A. C., Ghosh, K., Vierkant, R. A., Maloney, S. D., Pankratz, V. S., Hillman, D. W., et al. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa044383 · Cited by 938
Prospects for in vivo Raman spectroscopy
Hanlon, E. B., Manoharan, R., Koo, T.-W., Shafer, K. E., Motz, J. T., Fitzmaurice, M., Kramer, J. R., Itzkan, I., Dasari, R. R., & Feld, M. S. (2000) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/45/2/201 · Cited by 894
Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable?
Gøtzsche, P. C., & Olsen, O. (2000) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)06065-1 · Cited by 853
Metadata
- Authors
- Elmore, J. G., Barton, M. B., Moceri, V. M., Polk, S., Arena, P. J., & Fletcher, S. W.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1998-04-16
- Volume
- 338
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 1089-1096
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2325332048
- Cited by
- 1,053
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Ten-Year Risk of False Positive Screening Mammograms and Clinical Breast Examinations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199804163381601
- The paper
- Elmore, J. G., Barton, M. B., Moceri, V. M., Polk, S., Arena, P. J., & Fletcher, S. W. (1998). Ten-Year Risk of False Positive Screening Mammograms and Clinical Breast Examinations. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199804163381601
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.