Reply: Flawed methods explain the effect of mammography screening in Nijmegen
2011

Response to Concerns About Mammography Screening Effects

publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Verbeek A L M, Broeders M J M, van Schoor G, Moss S M, Otten J D M, Donders R, Paap E, den Heeten G J, Holland R

Primary Institution: Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre

Hypothesis

Does the case-referent design provide a valid estimate of the impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality?

Conclusion

The study supports that case-referent studies can yield valid estimates of the impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality.

Supporting Evidence

  • Earlier studies show that well-designed observational studies yield results similar to randomized controlled trials.
  • The case-referent design allows for efficient sampling of the population invited for screening.
  • Adjustments for self-selection bias can lead to larger effect estimates.

Takeaway

This study shows that looking at women who get screened for breast cancer can help us understand how effective screening is, even if some people think the methods are flawed.

Methodology

The study utilized a case-referent design to estimate the impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality.

Potential Biases

Self-selection bias in voluntary screening participation may confound efficacy estimates.

Limitations

The small size of the Nijmegen population and variations in screening uptake may dilute the observed effects.

Participant Demographics

The study focuses on women invited for breast cancer screening in Nijmegen.

Statistical Information

Confidence Interval

95% CI: 0.12–0.79

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1038/bjc.2011.265

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication