The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Transabdominal ultrasound screening for early ovarian cancer.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE--To assess the value of ultrasonography in a screening procedure for early ovarian cancer. DESIGN--Prospective study of at least 5000 self referred women without symptoms of ovarian cancer. Each woman was scheduled to undergo three annual screenings (consisting of one or more scans) to detect grossly abnormal ovaries or non-regressing masses. SETTING--The ovarian screening clinic at King's College Hospital, London. SUBJECTS--5479 Self referred women without symptoms (aged 18-78, mean age 52). INTERVENTIONS--Women with a positive result on screening were referred for laparoscopy or laparotomy, or both. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Findings at surgery and from histology of abnormal ovaries. RESULTS--A total of 14,594 screenings (15,977 scans) were performed. A positive result was obtained at 338 screens (2.3%) comprising 326 subjects (5.9%). Five patients with primary ovarian cancer (four stage Ia, one stage Ib; two at first screening three at second) were identified (prevalence 0.09%). An additional four patients had metastatic ovarian cancer (three at first screening, one at second). The apparent detection rate was 100%. It was not possible to differentiate between the ultrasonic appearance of early malignant and benign tumours. The rate of false positive results for primary ovarian cancer was 3.5% at the first screening, 1.8% at the second, and 1.2% at the third. Overall the rate of false positive results was 2.3%; the specificity was 97.7% and the predictive value of a positive result on screening was 1.5%. The odds that a positive result on screening indicated the presence of an ovarian tumour, any ovarian cancer, or primary ovarian cancer were about one to two, one to 37, and one to 67 respectively. CONCLUSION--Ultrasonography can be used to screen women without symptoms for persistent ovarian masses that will include early ovarian 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
Burke, W. (1997) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.277.12.997 · Cited by 955
Menon, U., Gentry-Maharaj, A., Burnell, M., Singh, N., Ryan, A., Karpinskyj, C., Carlino, G., Taylor, J., Massingham, S. K., Raikou, M., et al. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00731-5 · Cited by 730
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Campbell, S., Bhan, V., Royston, P., Whitehead, M. I., & Collins, W. P.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1989-12-02
- Volume
- 299
- Issue
- 6712
- Pages
- 1363-1367
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2041035603
- Cited by
- 284
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Transabdominal ultrasound screening for early ovarian cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.299.6712.1363
- The paper
- Campbell, S., Bhan, V., Royston, P., Whitehead, M. I., & Collins, W. P. (1989). Transabdominal ultrasound screening for early ovarian cancer. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.299.6712.1363
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.