The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Breast Cancer Mortality in Mammographic Screening in Europe: A Review of Incidence-Based Mortality Studies
Abstract
Objectives: To estimate the impact of service mammography screening on breast cancer mortality using European incidence-based mortality (IBM) studies (or refined mortality studies). IBM studies include only breast cancer deaths occurring in women with breast cancer diagnosed after their first invitation to screening. Methods: We conducted a literature review and identified 20 publications based on IBM studies. They were classified according to the method used for estimating the expected breast cancer mortality in the absence of screening: (1) women not yet invited; (2) historical data from the same region as well as from historical and current data from a region without screening; and (3) historical comparison group combined with data for non-participants. Results: The estimated effect of mammography screening on breast cancer mortality varied across studies. The relative risks were 0.76–0.81 in group 1; 0.75–0.90 in group 2; and 0.52–0.89 in group 3. Study databases overlapped in both Swedish and Finnish studies, adjustment for lead time was not optimal in all studies, and some studies had other methodological limitations. There was less variability in the relative risks after allowing for the methodological shortcomings. Conclusions: Based on evidence from the most methodologically sound IBM studies, the most likely impact of European service mammography screening programmes was a breast cancer mortality reduction of 26% (95% confidence interval 13–36%) among women invited for screening and followed up for 6–11 years.
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
Metan: fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis
Harris, R. J., Deeks, J. J., Altman, D. G., Bradburn, M. J., Harbord, R. M., & Sterne, J. A. C. (2008) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0800800102 · Cited by 1,027
Cited by
Mammography screening reduces rates of advanced and fatal breast cancers: Results in 549,091 women
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., et al. (2020) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.32859 · Cited by 412
Resource-stratified implementation of a community-based breast cancer management programme in Peru
Duggan, C., Dvaladze, A. L., Tsu, V., Jeronimo, J., Constant, T. K. H., Romanoff, A., Scheel, J. R., Patel, S., Gralow, J. R., & Anderson, B. O. (2017) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30592-2 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Njor, S., Nyström, L., Moss, S., Paci, E., Broeders, M., Segnan, N., & Lynge, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Screening
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1_suppl
- Pages
- 33-41
- ISSN
- 0969-1413 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-5793
- OpenAlex
- W2124273057
- Cited by
- 185
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.53
- 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: Breast Cancer Mortality in Mammographic Screening in Europe: A Review of Incidence-Based Mortality Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1258/jms.2012.012080
- The paper
- Njor, S., Nyström, L., Moss, S., Paci, E., Broeders, M., Segnan, N., & Lynge, E. (2012). Breast Cancer Mortality in Mammographic Screening in Europe: A Review of Incidence-Based Mortality Studies. Journal of Medical Screening. https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2012.012080
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.