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
. 2023 Sep 15;15(18):4576.
doi: 10.3390/cancers15184576.

Correction for Self-Selection in Breast Cancer Screening. Comment on Dibden et al. Worldwide Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies Measuring the Effect of Mammography Screening Programmes on Incidence-Based Breast Cancer Mortality. Cancers 2020, 12, 976

Affiliations

Correction for Self-Selection in Breast Cancer Screening. Comment on Dibden et al. Worldwide Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies Measuring the Effect of Mammography Screening Programmes on Incidence-Based Breast Cancer Mortality. Cancers 2020, 12, 976

Martin J Yaffe. Cancers (Basel). .

Abstract

Observational studies of cancer screening are subject to bias associated with the self-selection of screening participants for whom the underlying probability of cancer death may be different from those who do not participate. Dibden et al. reviewed data on mortality reduction from 27 observational studies of mammography screening expressed in terms of relative risk for women who were screened versus not screened. Results were given, both unadjusted and after application of a correction for self-selection. The correction was based on a constant (1.17)-the ratio of risks of death in screening non-attenders versus those not invited, derived from a Swedish study. For some of the studies this correction had a large effect in diminishing the measured mortality benefit associated with screening. In particular, application to The Pan-Canadian Study of Mammography Screening, a study whose authors had previously tested for and found no evidence of self-selection bias, caused the estimated benefit to decrease from 40% to 10%. The appropriateness of applying a correction based on a constant to a population whose healthcare environment and screening participation rates are very different from those from which it was derived is questionable.

Keywords: breast cancer; correction; observational studies; screening; self-selection bias.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares no conflict of interest related to this specific work.

Comment on

  • Cancers (Basel). 12:976.

References

    1. Dibden A., Offman J., Duffy S.W., Gabe R. Worldwide Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies Measuring the Effect of Mammography Screening Programmes on Incidence-Based Breast Cancer Mortality. Cancers. 2020;12:976. doi: 10.3390/cancers12040976. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Duffy S.W., Cuzick J., Tabar L., Vitak B., Hsiu-Hsi Chen T., Yen M.-F., Smith R.A. Correcting for non-compliance bias in case–control studies to evaluate cancer screening programmes. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. C (Appl. Stat.) 2002;51:235–243. doi: 10.1111/1467-9876.00266. - DOI
    1. Swedish Organised Service Screening Evaluation Group Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organized service screening with mammography: 1. Further confirmation with extended data. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2006;15:45–51. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0349. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Coldman A., Phillips N., Wilson C., Decker K., Chiarelli A.M., Brisson J., Zhang B., Payne J., Doyle G., Ahmad R. Pan-Canadian Study of Mammography Screening and Mortality from Breast Cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju261. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju261. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources