Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 2:12:817222.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.817222. eCollection 2022.

Determinants of Non-Participation in Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lilu Ding  1 , J Wang  1 , M J W Greuter  2   3 , M Goossens  4 , Guido Van Hal  4   5 , Geertruida H de Bock  1
Affiliations

Determinants of Non-Participation in Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lilu Ding et al. Front Oncol. .

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer (BC) screening can be performed in a screening program (BCSP) or in opportunistic screening. The existing reviews on the determinants of non-participation depend on self-reported data which may be biased. Furthermore, no distinction was made between the probably different determinants of both screening strategies.

Objective: To find the determinants of non-participation in BCSP by means of a meta-analysis.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for observational studies which quantified factors associated with non-participation in BCSP in a general population. Studies on opportunistic screening and studies using self-reported data were excluded. A random-effect model was used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Potential sources of heterogeneity were explored by stratification of the results.

Results: Twenty-nine studies with in a total of 20,361,756 women were included. Low income (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.10-1.30), low education (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.05-1.32), living far from an assigned screening unit (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.07-1.24), being immigrant (OR: 2.64, 95% CI: 2.48-2.82), and having a male family doctor (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.20-1.61) was associated with higher non-participation in screening. Reminders sent to non-attenders and estimations of ORs (adjusted or not) partly explained substantial heterogeneity.

Conclusion: In this meta-analysis excluding studies on the non-participation in opportunistic screening, or with self-reported data on non-participation, the well-known determinants for non-participation are still significant, but less strong. This analysis only supports the relevance of meta-analysis of studies with registered non-participation in a BCSP.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42020154016.

Keywords: breast cancer; determinant; mammography; mass screening; participation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the study selection.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I, Mathers C, Parkin DM, Piñeros M, et al. . Estimating the Global Cancer Incidence and Mortality in 2018: GLOBOCAN Sources and Methods. Int J Cancer (2019) 144:1941–53. doi: 10.1002/ijc.31937 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A, et al. . Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin (2018) 68:394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Myers ER, Moorman P, Gierisch JM, Havrilesky LJ, Grimm LJ, Ghate S, et al. . Benefits and Harms of Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. JAMA J Am Med Assoc (2015) 314:1615–34. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.13183 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Bouvard V, Bianchini F, et al. . Breast-Cancer Screening — Viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med (2015) 372:2353–8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsr1504363 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bhargava S, Moen K, Qureshi SA, Hofvind S. Mammographic Screening Attendance Among Immigrant and Minority Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Acta Radiol (2018) 59:1285–91. doi: 10.1177/0284185118758132 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources