Title |
Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009632.pub2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Gerald Gartlehner, Kylie Thaler, Andrea Chapman, Angela Kaminski‐Hartenthaler, Dominik Berzaczy, Megan G Van Noord, Thomas H Helbich |
Abstract |
Breast cancer is the most common malignant disease diagnosed in women worldwide. Screening with mammography has the ability to detect breast cancer at an early stage. The diagnostic accuracy of mammography screening largely depends on the radiographic density of the imaged breasts. In radiographically dense breasts, non-calcified breast cancers are more likely to be missed than in fatty breasts. As a consequence, some cancers are not detected by mammography screening. Supporters of adjunct ultrasonography to the screening regimen for breast cancer argue that it might be a safe and inexpensive approach to reduce the false negative rates of the screening process. Critics, however, are concerned that performing supplemental ultrasonography on women at average risk will also increase the rate of false positive findings and can lead to unnecessary biopsies and treatments. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Austria | 2 | 20% |
Spain | 1 | 10% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
Turkey | 1 | 10% |
France | 1 | 10% |
Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 60% |
Members of the public | 4 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
India | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Spain | 1 | <1% |
Japan | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 224 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 48 | 21% |
Student > Master | 22 | 10% |
Researcher | 21 | 9% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 6% |
Other | 42 | 18% |
Unknown | 64 | 28% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 84 | 37% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 12% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 4% |
Social Sciences | 6 | 3% |
Computer Science | 5 | 2% |
Other | 27 | 12% |
Unknown | 72 | 31% |