Performance indicators for participation in organized mammography screening
- PMID: 22233570
- DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdr106
Performance indicators for participation in organized mammography screening
Abstract
Background: A population's acceptance of a screening programme is reflected by its participation. Participation can be measured by cross-section, in an individual screening round, or by cumulative examination rate, which covers participation in numerous rounds at a pre-specified frequency. To establish an informed overview of programme performance, the relationship between these measures was analysed.
Methods: The Central Population Register (CPR) of Denmark was used to define the total population. The data sources were mammography screening programmes in Copenhagen (1991-2008) and Funen (1993-2008) and participation and coverage rates were calculated according to European guidelines. Long-term adherence was defined as the cumulative examination rate.
Results: The participation rates were 71% in Copenhagen and 91% in Funen. The cumulative examination rates across all invitation rounds were between 21 and 24% lower than the average participation rates.
Conclusions: If the cumulative examination rate across all, or the majority of, invitation rounds is substantially lower than the average participation rate it may suggest that standard cross-sectional performance indicators overestimate the level of protection provided to the women targeted by the programme. Consequently, it may prove valuable to include cumulative examination rate as a performance indicator of mammography screening.
Similar articles
-
Mammography screening in the county of Fyn. November 1993-December 1999.APMIS Suppl. 2003;(110):1-33. APMIS Suppl. 2003. PMID: 12739252
-
Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen April 1991-March 1997. Mammography Screening Evaluation Group.APMIS Suppl. 1998;83:1-44. APMIS Suppl. 1998. PMID: 9850674
-
Women's patterns of participation in mammography screening in Denmark.Eur J Epidemiol. 2006;21(3):203-9. doi: 10.1007/s10654-006-0002-1. Eur J Epidemiol. 2006. PMID: 16547835
-
How effective are breast cancer screening programmes by mammography? Review of the current evidence.Eur J Cancer. 2009 Jul;45(11):1916-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2009.03.022. Epub 2009 Apr 22. Eur J Cancer. 2009. PMID: 19398327 Review.
-
Clinical impact of introduction of mammography screening in a non-screening country with special reference to the Copenhagen service mammography screening programme.Scand J Surg. 2002;91(3):293-303. doi: 10.1177/145749690209100314. Scand J Surg. 2002. PMID: 12449474 Review. No abstract available.
Cited by
-
Risk of breast cancer after false-positive results in mammographic screening.Cancer Med. 2016 Jun;5(6):1298-306. doi: 10.1002/cam4.646. Epub 2016 Feb 25. Cancer Med. 2016. PMID: 26916154 Free PMC article.
-
Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.Int J Cancer. 2015 Nov 1;137(9):2198-207. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29593. Epub 2015 Jun 1. Int J Cancer. 2015. PMID: 25944711 Free PMC article.
-
Long-term risk of screen-detected and interval breast cancer after false-positive results at mammography screening: joint analysis of three national cohorts.Br J Cancer. 2019 Jan;120(2):269-275. doi: 10.1038/s41416-018-0358-5. Epub 2018 Dec 19. Br J Cancer. 2019. PMID: 30563993 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of cumulative false-positive risk of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.Cancer Epidemiol. 2015 Aug;39(4):656-63. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2015.05.004. Epub 2015 May 23. Cancer Epidemiol. 2015. PMID: 26013768 Free PMC article.
-
Choice of Assessment and Subsequent Risk of Breast Cancer among Women with False-Positive Mammography Screening.Cancers (Basel). 2023 Mar 20;15(6):1867. doi: 10.3390/cancers15061867. Cancers (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36980754 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical