↓ Skip to main content

Position paper on screening for breast cancer by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) and 30 national breast radiology bodies from Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria…

Overview of attention for article published in European Radiology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
30 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
142 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
251 Mendeley
Title
Position paper on screening for breast cancer by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) and 30 national breast radiology bodies from Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Israel, Lithuania, Moldova, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey
Published in
European Radiology, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00330-016-4612-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesco Sardanelli, Hildegunn S. Aase, Marina Álvarez, Edward Azavedo, Henk J. Baarslag, Corinne Balleyguier, Pascal A. Baltzer, Vanesa Beslagic, Ulrich Bick, Dragana Bogdanovic-Stojanovic, Ruta Briediene, Boris Brkljacic, Julia Camps Herrero, Catherine Colin, Eleanor Cornford, Jan Danes, Gérard de Geer, Gul Esen, Andrew Evans, Michael H. Fuchsjaeger, Fiona J. Gilbert, Oswald Graf, Gormlaith Hargaden, Thomas H. Helbich, Sylvia H. Heywang-Köbrunner, Valentin Ivanov, Ásbjörn Jónsson, Christiane K. Kuhl, Eugenia C. Lisencu, Elzbieta Luczynska, Ritse M. Mann, Jose C. Marques, Laura Martincich, Margarete Mortier, Markus Müller-Schimpfle, Katalin Ormandi, Pietro Panizza, Federica Pediconi, Ruud M. Pijnappel, Katja Pinker, Tarja Rissanen, Natalia Rotaru, Gianni Saguatti, Tamar Sella, Jana Slobodníková, Maret Talk, Patrice Taourel, Rubina M. Trimboli, Ilse Vejborg, Athina Vourtsis, Gabor Forrai

Abstract

EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support mammography for population-based screening, demonstrated to reduce breast cancer (BC) mortality and treatment impact. According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the reduction in mortality is 40 % for women aged 50-69 years taking up the invitation while the probability of false-positive needle biopsy is <1 % per round and overdiagnosis is only 1-10 % for a 20-year screening. Mortality reduction was also observed for the age groups 40-49 years and 70-74 years, although with "limited evidence". Thus, we firstly recommend biennial screening mammography for average-risk women aged 50-69 years; extension up to 73 or 75 years, biennially, is a second priority, from 40-45 to 49 years, annually, a third priority. Screening with thermography or other optical tools as alternatives to mammography is discouraged. Preference should be given to population screening programmes on a territorial basis, with double reading. Adoption of digital mammography (not film-screen or phosphor-plate computer radiography) is a priority, which also improves sensitivity in dense breasts. Radiologists qualified as screening readers should be involved in programmes. Digital breast tomosynthesis is also set to become "routine mammography" in the screening setting in the next future. Dedicated pathways for high-risk women offering breast MRI according to national or international guidelines and recommendations are encouraged. • EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support screening mammography. • A first priority is double-reading biennial mammography for women aged 50-69 years. • Extension to 73-75 and from 40-45 to 49 years is also encouraged. • Digital mammography (not film-screen or computer radiography) should be used. • DBT is set to become "routine mammography" in the screening setting in the next future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 251 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 250 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 11%
Student > Master 27 11%
Other 24 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 8%
Student > Bachelor 19 8%
Other 52 21%
Unknown 81 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 84 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 6%
Engineering 13 5%
Psychology 7 3%
Computer Science 6 2%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 92 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,364,804
of 24,397,600 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#76
of 4,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,305
of 316,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#2
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,397,600 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,594 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.