Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 716

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized Trial of Breast Self-Examination in Shanghai: Final Results

Thomas, D. B., Gao, D. L., Ray, R. M., Wang, W. W., Allison, C. J., Chen, F. L., Porter, P., Hu, Y. W., Zhao, G. L., Pan, L. D., Li, W., Wu, C., Coriaty, Z., Evans, I., Lin, M. G., Stalsberg, H., Self, S. G.·2002·JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Among women who practice breast self-examination (BSE), breast cancers may be detected when they are at an earlier stage and are smaller than in women who do not practice BSE. However, the efficacy of breast self-examination for decreasing breast cancer mortality is unproven. This study was conducted to determine whether an intensive program of BSE instruction will reduce the number of women dying of breast cancer. METHODS: From October 1989 through October 1991, 266,064 women associated with 519 factories in Shanghai were randomly assigned to a BSE instruction group (132,979 women) or a control group (133,085 women). Initial instruction in BSE was followed by reinforcement sessions 1 and 3 years later, by BSE practice under medical supervision at least every 6 months for 5 years, and by ongoing reminders to practice BSE monthly. The women were followed through December 2000 for mortality from breast cancer. Cumulative risk ratios of dying from breast cancer were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: There were 135 (0.10%) breast cancer deaths in the instruction group and 131 (0.10%) in the control group. The cumulative breast cancer mortality rates through 10 to 11 years of follow-up were similar (cumulative risk ratio for women in the instruction group relative to that in the control group = 1.04, 95% confidence interval = 0.82 to 1.33; P =.72). However, more benign breast lesions were diagnosed in the instruction group than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive instruction in BSE did not reduce mortality from breast cancer. Programs to encourage BSE in the absence of mammography would be unlikely to reduce mortality from breast cancer. Women who choose to practice BSE should be informed that its efficacy is unproven and that it may increase their chances of having a benign breast biopsy.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jnci/94.19.1445

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 716

Metadata

Authors
Thomas, D. B., Gao, D. L., Ray, R. M., Wang, W. W., Allison, C. J., Chen, F. L., Porter, P., Hu, Y. W., Zhao, G. L., Pan, L. D., Li, W., Wu, C., Coriaty, Z., Evans, I., Lin, M. G., Stalsberg, H., & Self, S. G.
Venue
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
2002-10-02
Volume
94
Issue
19
Pages
1445-1457
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2131607744
Cited by
716
References
1
FWCI
38.99
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: Randomized Trial of Breast Self-Examination in Shanghai: Final Results. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/94.19.1445
The paper
Thomas, D. B., Gao, D. L., Ray, R. M., Wang, W. W., Allison, C. J., Chen, F. L., Porter, P., Hu, Y. W., Zhao, G. L., Pan, L. D., Li, W., Wu, C., Coriaty, Z., Evans, I., Lin, M. G., Stalsberg, H., & Self, S. G. (2002). Randomized Trial of Breast Self-Examination in Shanghai: Final Results. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/94.19.1445

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.