Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study
Background Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) around mammography screening for women ≥ 75 years old. Objective To use microsimulation modeling to estimate the lifetime benefits and harms of screening women aged 75, 80, and 85 years based on their individual risk factors (family histor...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM 2024-02, Vol.39 (3), p.428-439 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 439 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 428 |
container_title | Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM |
container_volume | 39 |
creator | Jayasekera, Jinani Stein, Sarah Wilson, Oliver W. A. Wojcik, Kaitlyn M. Kamil, Dalya Røssell, Eeva-Liisa Abraham, Linn A. O’Meara, Ellen S. Schoenborn, Nancy Li Schechter, Clyde B. Mandelblatt, Jeanne S. Schonberg, Mara A. Stout, Natasha K. |
description | Background
Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) around mammography screening for women ≥ 75 years old.
Objective
To use microsimulation modeling to estimate the lifetime benefits and harms of screening women aged 75, 80, and 85 years based on their individual risk factors (family history, breast density, prior biopsy) and comorbidity level to support SDM in clinical practice.
Design, Setting, and Participants
We adapted two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models to evaluate the remaining lifetime benefits and harms of screening U.S. women born in 1940, at decision ages 75, 80, and 85 years considering their individual risk factors and comorbidity levels. Results were summarized for average- and higher-risk women (defined as having breast cancer family history, heterogeneously dense breasts, and no prior biopsy, 5% of the population).
Main Outcomes and Measures
Remaining lifetime breast cancers detected, deaths (breast cancer/other causes), false positives, and overdiagnoses for average- and higher-risk women by age and comorbidity level for screening (one or five screens) vs. no screening per 1000 women.
Results
Compared to stopping, one additional screen at 75 years old resulted in six and eight more breast cancers detected (10% overdiagnoses), one and two fewer breast cancer deaths, and 52 and 59 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk women without comorbidities, respectively. Five additional screens over 10 years led to 23 and 31 additional breast cancer cases (29–31% overdiagnoses), four and 15 breast cancer deaths avoided, and 238 and 268 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk screened women without comorbidities, respectively. Screening women at older ages (80 and 85 years old) and high comorbidity levels led to fewer breast cancer deaths and a higher percentage of overdiagnoses.
Conclusions
Simulation models show that continuing screening in women ≥ 75 years old results in fewer breast cancer deaths but more false positive tests and overdiagnoses. Together, clinicians and 75 + women may use model output to weigh the benefits and harms of continued screening. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11606-023-08518-4 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2894722464</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2931867013</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-5eeb79078b611be33ea62d3aa5ad836dc2a28d9f6f12d12a42a80342d3a2a2dd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kb9uFDEQhy1ERC6BF6BAlmiQog3-t2svHQRCIiWiOBClNbeevWxY24e9W5xoaHlNniQ-LoBEQWGN5PnmszU_Qp5ydsoZ0y8z5w1rKiZkxUzNTaUekAWvRV1x1eqHZMGMUZXRUh2So5xvGeNSCPOIHErDOFO1WZBvbzBgP0yZQnD0ApLPNPb0GryP6wSbmy1ddgkxDGFNh0B1_fP7j5NyPkePgU6RXoY-Jk-XN5DQ0bfYDXmIofLwpYy8okCXg59HmMolvY4Ox51pOc1u-5gc9DBmfHJfj8mn83cfzy6qqw_vL89eX1Wd1PVU1Ygr3TJtVg3nK5QSoRFOAtTgjGxcJ0AY1_ZNz4XjApQAw6TaIaXjnDwmL_beTYpfZ8yT9UPucBwhYJyzFaZVWgjVqII-_we9jXMK5XdWtJKbRpcdFkrsqS7FnBP2dpMGD2lrObO7aOw-Gluisb-isTv1s3v1vPLo_oz8zqIAcg_k0gprTH_f_o_2DtXfmsw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2931867013</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Jayasekera, Jinani ; Stein, Sarah ; Wilson, Oliver W. A. ; Wojcik, Kaitlyn M. ; Kamil, Dalya ; Røssell, Eeva-Liisa ; Abraham, Linn A. ; O’Meara, Ellen S. ; Schoenborn, Nancy Li ; Schechter, Clyde B. ; Mandelblatt, Jeanne S. ; Schonberg, Mara A. ; Stout, Natasha K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Jayasekera, Jinani ; Stein, Sarah ; Wilson, Oliver W. A. ; Wojcik, Kaitlyn M. ; Kamil, Dalya ; Røssell, Eeva-Liisa ; Abraham, Linn A. ; O’Meara, Ellen S. ; Schoenborn, Nancy Li ; Schechter, Clyde B. ; Mandelblatt, Jeanne S. ; Schonberg, Mara A. ; Stout, Natasha K.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) around mammography screening for women ≥ 75 years old.
Objective
To use microsimulation modeling to estimate the lifetime benefits and harms of screening women aged 75, 80, and 85 years based on their individual risk factors (family history, breast density, prior biopsy) and comorbidity level to support SDM in clinical practice.
Design, Setting, and Participants
We adapted two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models to evaluate the remaining lifetime benefits and harms of screening U.S. women born in 1940, at decision ages 75, 80, and 85 years considering their individual risk factors and comorbidity levels. Results were summarized for average- and higher-risk women (defined as having breast cancer family history, heterogeneously dense breasts, and no prior biopsy, 5% of the population).
Main Outcomes and Measures
Remaining lifetime breast cancers detected, deaths (breast cancer/other causes), false positives, and overdiagnoses for average- and higher-risk women by age and comorbidity level for screening (one or five screens) vs. no screening per 1000 women.
Results
Compared to stopping, one additional screen at 75 years old resulted in six and eight more breast cancers detected (10% overdiagnoses), one and two fewer breast cancer deaths, and 52 and 59 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk women without comorbidities, respectively. Five additional screens over 10 years led to 23 and 31 additional breast cancer cases (29–31% overdiagnoses), four and 15 breast cancer deaths avoided, and 238 and 268 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk screened women without comorbidities, respectively. Screening women at older ages (80 and 85 years old) and high comorbidity levels led to fewer breast cancer deaths and a higher percentage of overdiagnoses.
Conclusions
Simulation models show that continuing screening in women ≥ 75 years old results in fewer breast cancer deaths but more false positive tests and overdiagnoses. Together, clinicians and 75 + women may use model output to weigh the benefits and harms of continued screening.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0884-8734</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1525-1497</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-1497</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11606-023-08518-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38010458</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biopsy ; Breast ; Breast cancer ; Breast Density ; Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology ; Clinical decision making ; Comorbidity ; Computer Simulation ; Decision making ; Early Detection of Cancer - adverse effects ; Early Detection of Cancer - methods ; Family medical history ; Fatalities ; Female ; Genetics ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Mammography ; Mammography - adverse effects ; Mammography - methods ; Mass Screening - adverse effects ; Mass Screening - methods ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Modelling ; Original Research ; Risk factors ; Service life assessment ; Simulation models</subject><ispartof>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2024-02, Vol.39 (3), p.428-439</ispartof><rights>This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2023</rights><rights>2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.</rights><rights>This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2023.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-5eeb79078b611be33ea62d3aa5ad836dc2a28d9f6f12d12a42a80342d3a2a2dd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-5eeb79078b611be33ea62d3aa5ad836dc2a28d9f6f12d12a42a80342d3a2a2dd3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9212-7225</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11606-023-08518-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11606-023-08518-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27928,27929,41492,42561,51323</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38010458$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jayasekera, Jinani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Oliver W. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wojcik, Kaitlyn M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kamil, Dalya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Røssell, Eeva-Liisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abraham, Linn A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Meara, Ellen S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schoenborn, Nancy Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schechter, Clyde B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schonberg, Mara A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stout, Natasha K.</creatorcontrib><title>Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study</title><title>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</title><addtitle>J GEN INTERN MED</addtitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><description>Background
Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) around mammography screening for women ≥ 75 years old.
Objective
To use microsimulation modeling to estimate the lifetime benefits and harms of screening women aged 75, 80, and 85 years based on their individual risk factors (family history, breast density, prior biopsy) and comorbidity level to support SDM in clinical practice.
Design, Setting, and Participants
We adapted two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models to evaluate the remaining lifetime benefits and harms of screening U.S. women born in 1940, at decision ages 75, 80, and 85 years considering their individual risk factors and comorbidity levels. Results were summarized for average- and higher-risk women (defined as having breast cancer family history, heterogeneously dense breasts, and no prior biopsy, 5% of the population).
Main Outcomes and Measures
Remaining lifetime breast cancers detected, deaths (breast cancer/other causes), false positives, and overdiagnoses for average- and higher-risk women by age and comorbidity level for screening (one or five screens) vs. no screening per 1000 women.
Results
Compared to stopping, one additional screen at 75 years old resulted in six and eight more breast cancers detected (10% overdiagnoses), one and two fewer breast cancer deaths, and 52 and 59 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk women without comorbidities, respectively. Five additional screens over 10 years led to 23 and 31 additional breast cancer cases (29–31% overdiagnoses), four and 15 breast cancer deaths avoided, and 238 and 268 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk screened women without comorbidities, respectively. Screening women at older ages (80 and 85 years old) and high comorbidity levels led to fewer breast cancer deaths and a higher percentage of overdiagnoses.
Conclusions
Simulation models show that continuing screening in women ≥ 75 years old results in fewer breast cancer deaths but more false positive tests and overdiagnoses. Together, clinicians and 75 + women may use model output to weigh the benefits and harms of continued screening.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>Breast</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Breast Density</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology</subject><subject>Clinical decision making</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - adverse effects</subject><subject>Early Detection of Cancer - methods</subject><subject>Family medical history</subject><subject>Fatalities</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genetics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Mammography</subject><subject>Mammography - adverse effects</subject><subject>Mammography - methods</subject><subject>Mass Screening - adverse effects</subject><subject>Mass Screening - methods</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Service life assessment</subject><subject>Simulation models</subject><issn>0884-8734</issn><issn>1525-1497</issn><issn>1525-1497</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kb9uFDEQhy1ERC6BF6BAlmiQog3-t2svHQRCIiWiOBClNbeevWxY24e9W5xoaHlNniQ-LoBEQWGN5PnmszU_Qp5ydsoZ0y8z5w1rKiZkxUzNTaUekAWvRV1x1eqHZMGMUZXRUh2So5xvGeNSCPOIHErDOFO1WZBvbzBgP0yZQnD0ApLPNPb0GryP6wSbmy1ddgkxDGFNh0B1_fP7j5NyPkePgU6RXoY-Jk-XN5DQ0bfYDXmIofLwpYy8okCXg59HmMolvY4Ox51pOc1u-5gc9DBmfHJfj8mn83cfzy6qqw_vL89eX1Wd1PVU1Ygr3TJtVg3nK5QSoRFOAtTgjGxcJ0AY1_ZNz4XjApQAw6TaIaXjnDwmL_beTYpfZ8yT9UPucBwhYJyzFaZVWgjVqII-_we9jXMK5XdWtJKbRpcdFkrsqS7FnBP2dpMGD2lrObO7aOw-Gluisb-isTv1s3v1vPLo_oz8zqIAcg_k0gprTH_f_o_2DtXfmsw</recordid><startdate>20240201</startdate><enddate>20240201</enddate><creator>Jayasekera, Jinani</creator><creator>Stein, Sarah</creator><creator>Wilson, Oliver W. A.</creator><creator>Wojcik, Kaitlyn M.</creator><creator>Kamil, Dalya</creator><creator>Røssell, Eeva-Liisa</creator><creator>Abraham, Linn A.</creator><creator>O’Meara, Ellen S.</creator><creator>Schoenborn, Nancy Li</creator><creator>Schechter, Clyde B.</creator><creator>Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.</creator><creator>Schonberg, Mara A.</creator><creator>Stout, Natasha K.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-7225</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240201</creationdate><title>Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study</title><author>Jayasekera, Jinani ; Stein, Sarah ; Wilson, Oliver W. A. ; Wojcik, Kaitlyn M. ; Kamil, Dalya ; Røssell, Eeva-Liisa ; Abraham, Linn A. ; O’Meara, Ellen S. ; Schoenborn, Nancy Li ; Schechter, Clyde B. ; Mandelblatt, Jeanne S. ; Schonberg, Mara A. ; Stout, Natasha K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-5eeb79078b611be33ea62d3aa5ad836dc2a28d9f6f12d12a42a80342d3a2a2dd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>Breast</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Breast Density</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology</topic><topic>Clinical decision making</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - adverse effects</topic><topic>Early Detection of Cancer - methods</topic><topic>Family medical history</topic><topic>Fatalities</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genetics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Mammography</topic><topic>Mammography - adverse effects</topic><topic>Mammography - methods</topic><topic>Mass Screening - adverse effects</topic><topic>Mass Screening - methods</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Service life assessment</topic><topic>Simulation models</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jayasekera, Jinani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Oliver W. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wojcik, Kaitlyn M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kamil, Dalya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Røssell, Eeva-Liisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abraham, Linn A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Meara, Ellen S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schoenborn, Nancy Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schechter, Clyde B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schonberg, Mara A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stout, Natasha K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jayasekera, Jinani</au><au>Stein, Sarah</au><au>Wilson, Oliver W. A.</au><au>Wojcik, Kaitlyn M.</au><au>Kamil, Dalya</au><au>Røssell, Eeva-Liisa</au><au>Abraham, Linn A.</au><au>O’Meara, Ellen S.</au><au>Schoenborn, Nancy Li</au><au>Schechter, Clyde B.</au><au>Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.</au><au>Schonberg, Mara A.</au><au>Stout, Natasha K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</jtitle><stitle>J GEN INTERN MED</stitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><date>2024-02-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>428</spage><epage>439</epage><pages>428-439</pages><issn>0884-8734</issn><issn>1525-1497</issn><eissn>1525-1497</eissn><abstract>Background
Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) around mammography screening for women ≥ 75 years old.
Objective
To use microsimulation modeling to estimate the lifetime benefits and harms of screening women aged 75, 80, and 85 years based on their individual risk factors (family history, breast density, prior biopsy) and comorbidity level to support SDM in clinical practice.
Design, Setting, and Participants
We adapted two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models to evaluate the remaining lifetime benefits and harms of screening U.S. women born in 1940, at decision ages 75, 80, and 85 years considering their individual risk factors and comorbidity levels. Results were summarized for average- and higher-risk women (defined as having breast cancer family history, heterogeneously dense breasts, and no prior biopsy, 5% of the population).
Main Outcomes and Measures
Remaining lifetime breast cancers detected, deaths (breast cancer/other causes), false positives, and overdiagnoses for average- and higher-risk women by age and comorbidity level for screening (one or five screens) vs. no screening per 1000 women.
Results
Compared to stopping, one additional screen at 75 years old resulted in six and eight more breast cancers detected (10% overdiagnoses), one and two fewer breast cancer deaths, and 52 and 59 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk women without comorbidities, respectively. Five additional screens over 10 years led to 23 and 31 additional breast cancer cases (29–31% overdiagnoses), four and 15 breast cancer deaths avoided, and 238 and 268 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk screened women without comorbidities, respectively. Screening women at older ages (80 and 85 years old) and high comorbidity levels led to fewer breast cancer deaths and a higher percentage of overdiagnoses.
Conclusions
Simulation models show that continuing screening in women ≥ 75 years old results in fewer breast cancer deaths but more false positive tests and overdiagnoses. Together, clinicians and 75 + women may use model output to weigh the benefits and harms of continued screening.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>38010458</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11606-023-08518-4</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-7225</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0884-8734 |
ispartof | Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2024-02, Vol.39 (3), p.428-439 |
issn | 0884-8734 1525-1497 1525-1497 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2894722464 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
subjects | Aged Aged, 80 and over Biopsy Breast Breast cancer Breast Density Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology Clinical decision making Comorbidity Computer Simulation Decision making Early Detection of Cancer - adverse effects Early Detection of Cancer - methods Family medical history Fatalities Female Genetics Humans Internal Medicine Mammography Mammography - adverse effects Mammography - methods Mass Screening - adverse effects Mass Screening - methods Medicine Medicine & Public Health Modelling Original Research Risk factors Service life assessment Simulation models |
title | Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-17T12%3A02%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Benefits%20and%20Harms%20of%20Mammography%20Screening%20in%2075%E2%80%89+%E2%80%89Women%20to%20Inform%20Shared%20Decision-making:%20a%20Simulation%20Modeling%20Study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20general%20internal%20medicine%20:%20JGIM&rft.au=Jayasekera,%20Jinani&rft.date=2024-02-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=428&rft.epage=439&rft.pages=428-439&rft.issn=0884-8734&rft.eissn=1525-1497&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11606-023-08518-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2931867013%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2931867013&rft_id=info:pmid/38010458&rfr_iscdi=true |