The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Psychological and Behavioral Implications of Abnormal Mammograms
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate women's psychological responses to abnormal mammograms and the effect on mammography adherence. To identify psychological responses and other factors that predict mammography adherence in women with normal or abnormal mammograms. DESIGN: Survey study with prospective analysis of factors associated with mammography adherence. SETTING: Health Maintenance Organization of Pennsylvania and New Jersey (HMO PA/NJ). PATIENTS: Study patients, members of HMO PA/NJ who were 50 years of age or older, and who had had mammography done 3 months earlier, included women with normal mammograms (n = 121), women with low-suspicion mammograms (n = 119), and women with high-suspicion mammograms (n = 68), but not women with breast cancer. MEASUREMENTS: Psychological responses 3 months after mammography and adherence to subsequent annual mammography were assessed. MAIN RESULTS: Women with high-suspicion mammograms had substantial mammography-related anxiety (47%) and worries about breast cancer (41%). Such worries affected the moods (26%) and daily functioning (17%) of these women, despite diagnostic evaluation excluding malignancy. For each variable, a consistent trend (P greater than 0.05) was seen with degree of mammogram abnormality. Sixty-eight percent of women with normal results, 78% of women with low-suspicion results, and 74% of women with high-suspicion results obtained their subsequent annual mammograms (P greater than 0.05). The number of previous mammograms (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.6 to 6.2) and the effect of the previous results on concerns about breast cancer (odds ratio, 0.5; CI, 0.2 to 1.0) were independent predictors of adherence in logistic regression analyses (P less than 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of women with suspicious mammograms have psychological difficulties, even after learning that they do not have cancer. Such sequelae do not appear to interfere with subsequent adherence.
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
Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice
(1992) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-116-4-350_1 · Cited by 13,207
Epidemiologic Research: Principles and Quantitative Methods.
Mayer, L. S., Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., & Morgenstern, H. (1984) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288427 · Cited by 2,905
Risk Factors for Breast Cancer in Women with Proliferative Breast Disease
Dupont, W. D., & Page, D. L. (1985) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198501173120303 · Cited by 1,829
Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: Five-Year Summary Report
Baker, L. H. (1982) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/canjclin.32.4.194 · Cited by 694
Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening.
Lerman, C., Trock, B., Rimer, B. K., & Jepson, C. (1991) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037//0278-6133.10.4.259 · Cited by 624
Self-citationThe health belief model: Explaining health behavior through expectancies.
Rosenstock, I. M. (1990) · Cited by 598
Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening
Lerman, C., Rimer, B., Trock, B., Balshem, A., & Engstrom, P. F. (1990) · Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/0091-7435(90)90028-i · Cited by 466
Self-citation(1990) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.264.1.54 · Cited by 317
Why women resist screening mammography: patient-related barriers.
Rimer, B. K., Keintz, M. K., Kessler, H. B., et al. (1989) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.172.1.2740510 · Cited by 246
Self-citation
Cited by
Cancer Screening in Elderly Patients: A Framework for Individualized Decision Making
Walter, L. C., & Covinsky, K. E. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.21.2750 · Cited by 1,003
(2003) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.168.7.818 · Cited by 911
Stoller, J., Snider, G., Brantly, M., Fallat, R., Stockley, R., Turino, G., Konietzko, N., Dirksen, A., Eden, E., Fallat, R., et al. (2005) · Pneumologie · doi:10.1055/s-2004-830176 · Cited by 477
Systematic Review: The Long-Term Effects of False-Positive Mammograms
Brewer, N. T., Salz, T., & Lillie, S. E. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-146-7-200704030-00006 · Cited by 455
Anderson, B. O., Shyyan, R., Eniu, A., Smith, R. A., Yip, C.-H., Bese, N. S., Chow, L. W. C., Masood, S., Ramsey, S. D., & Carlson, R. W. (2006) · The Breast Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1075-122x.2006.00199.x · Cited by 359
Metadata
- Authors
- Lerman, C., Track, B., Rimer, B. K., Boyce, A., Jepson, C., & Engstrom, P. F.
- Venue
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Published
- 1991-04-15
- Volume
- 114
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 657-661
- ISSN
- 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3704
- OpenAlex
- W1982577230
- Cited by
- 481
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 14.91
- 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: Psychological and Behavioral Implications of Abnormal Mammograms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-114-8-657
- The paper
- Lerman, C., Track, B., Rimer, B. K., Boyce, A., Jepson, C., & Engstrom, P. F. (1991). Psychological and Behavioral Implications of Abnormal Mammograms. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-114-8-657
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.