CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,094Digital Radiography and Breast ImagingGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningWomen's cancer prevention and management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Open access
Siu, Albert L., on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force·2016·Annals of Internal Medicine
DOI 10.7326/m15-2886
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

DESCRIPTION: Update of the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for breast cancer. METHODS: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the following: effectiveness of breast cancer screening in reducing breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality, as well as the incidence of advanced breast cancer and treatment-related morbidity; harms of breast cancer screening; test performance characteristics of digital breast tomosynthesis as a primary screening strategy; and adjunctive screening in women with increased breast density. In addition, the USPSTF reviewed comparative decision models on optimal starting and stopping ages and intervals for screening mammography; how breast density, breast cancer risk, and comorbidity level affect the balance of benefit and harms of screening mammography; and the number of radiation-induced breast cancer cases and deaths associated with different screening mammography strategies over the course of a woman's lifetime. POPULATION: This recommendation applies to asymptomatic women aged 40 years or older who do not have preexisting breast cancer or a previously diagnosed high-risk breast lesion and who are not at high risk for breast cancer because of a known underlying genetic mutation (such as a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation or other familial breast cancer syndrome) or a history of chest radiation at a young age. RECOMMENDATIONS: The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 50 to 74 years. (B recommendation) The decision to start screening mammography in women prior to age 50 years should be an individual one. Women who place a higher value on the potential benefit than the potential harms may choose to begin biennial screening between the ages of 40 and 49 years. (C recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography in women aged 75 years or older. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the benefits and harms of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) as a primary screening method for breast cancer. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of adjunctive screening for breast cancer using breast ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), DBT, or other methods in women identified to have dense breasts on an otherwise negative screening mammogram. (I statement).

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/m15-2886

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Sabatino SA, 2015, MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep, 64, 464

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 2,094

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Siu, A. L., & on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Affiliations
United States Preventive Services Task Force (US)
Corresponding author
on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
ORCID
Siu, Albert L.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Publisher
American College of Physicians
Published
2016-02-16
Volume
164
Issue
4
Pages
279-296
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
DOI
10.7326/m15-2886
OpenAlex
W2283351472
Cited by
2,094
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 195 · 2023: 229 · 2022: 236 · 2021: 216 · 2020: 206 · 2019: 170 · 2018: 185 · 2017: 163 · 2016: 130
FWCI
193.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.acpjournals.org/journal/aim/text-and-data-mining (tdm)
Locations
  • Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Digital Radiography and Breast Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
Keywords
breast cancer screening, mammography screening, digital breast tomosynthesis, breast density, dense breasts, breast ultrasound, breast MRI, radiation-induced breast cancer, screening harms, breast cancer mortality, women over 40
MeSH terms
Medical Overuse, Breast Density, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Breast, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Mammography, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Risk Assessment, Biomedical Research, Mammary Glands, Human, Early Detection of Cancer

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