↓ Skip to main content

Implications of Overdiagnosis: Impact on Screening Mammography Practices

Overview of attention for article published in Population Health Management, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#40 of 639)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
17 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Implications of Overdiagnosis: Impact on Screening Mammography Practices
Published in
Population Health Management, September 2015
DOI 10.1089/pop.2015.29023.mor
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This review article explores the issue of overdiagnosis in screening mammography. Overdiagnosis is the screen detection of a breast cancer, histologically confirmed, that might not otherwise become clinically apparent during the lifetime of the patient. While screening mammography is an imperfect tool, it remains the best tool we have to diagnose breast cancer early, before a patient is symptomatic and at a time when chances of survival and options for treatment are most favorable. In 2015, an estimated 231,840 new cases of breast cancer (excluding ductal carcinoma in situ) will be diagnosed in the United States, and some 40,290 women will die. Despite these data, screening mammography for women ages 40-69 has contributed to a substantial reduction in breast cancer mortality, and organized screening programs have led to a shift from late-stage diagnosis to early-stage detection. Current estimates of overdiagnosis in screening mammography vary widely, from 0% to upwards of 30% of diagnosed cancers. This range reflects the fact that measuring overdiagnosis is not a straightforward calculation, but usually one based on different sets of assumptions and often biased by methodological flaws. The recent development of tomosynthesis, which creates high-resolution, three-dimensional images, has increased breast cancer detection while reducing false recalls. Because the greatest harm of overdiagnosis is overtreatment, the key goal should not be less diagnosis but better treatment decision tools. (Population Health Management 2015;18:S3-S11).

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 157 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Student > Master 19 12%
Researcher 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 46 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 9%
Engineering 12 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 53 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 21 July 2026.
All research outputs
#990,780
of 33,197,925 outputs
Outputs from Population Health Management
#40
of 639 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,379
of 294,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Population Health Management
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,197,925 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 639 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 294,718 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 92% of its contemporaries.