↓ Skip to main content

Annals for Internal Medicine

Breast Cancer Screening in Denmark: A Cohort Study of Tumor Size and Overdiagnosis.

Overview of attention for article published in ACP Journal Club, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
85 news outlets
blogs
10 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
362 X users
facebook
19 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
Breast Cancer Screening in Denmark: A Cohort Study of Tumor Size and Overdiagnosis.
Published in
ACP Journal Club, January 2017
DOI 10.7326/m16-0270
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, Peter C Gøtzsche, Mette Kalager, Per-Henrik Zahl

Abstract

Effective breast cancer screening should detect early-stage cancer and prevent advanced disease. To assess the association between screening and the size of detected tumors and to estimate overdiagnosis (detection of tumors that would not become clinically relevant). Cohort study. Denmark from 1980 to 2010. Women aged 35 to 84 years. Screening programs offering biennial mammography for women aged 50 to 69 years beginning in different regions at different times. Trends in the incidence of advanced (>20 mm) and nonadvanced (≤20 mm) breast cancer tumors in screened and nonscreened women were measured. Two approaches were used to estimate the amount of overdiagnosis: comparing the incidence of advance and nonadvanced tumors among women aged 50 to 84 years in screening and nonscreening areas; and comparing the incidence for nonadvanced tumors among women aged 35 to 49, 50 to 69, and 70 to 84 years in screening and nonscreening areas. Screening was not associated with lower incidence of advanced tumors. The incidence of nonadvanced tumors increased in the screening versus prescreening periods (incidence rate ratio, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.43 to 1.54]). The first estimation approach found that 271 invasive breast cancer tumors and 179 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions were overdiagnosed in 2010 (overdiagnosis rate of 24.4% [including DCIS] and 14.7% [excluding DCIS]). The second approach, which accounted for regional differences in women younger than the screening age, found that 711 invasive tumors and 180 cases of DCIS were overdiagnosed in 2010 (overdiagnosis rate of 48.3% [including DCIS] and 38.6% [excluding DCIS]). Regional differences complicate interpretation. Breast cancer screening was not associated with a reduction in the incidence of advanced cancer. It is likely that 1 in every 3 invasive tumors and cases of DCIS diagnosed in women offered screening represent overdiagnosis (incidence increase of 48.3%). None.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 362 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 120 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 16%
Other 15 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Master 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 28 23%
Unknown 24 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Computer Science 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 29 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 978. 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 06 March 2024.
All research outputs
#17,083
of 25,782,917 outputs
Outputs from ACP Journal Club
#116
of 13,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#304
of 425,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ACP Journal Club
#5
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,782,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,154 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 64.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 425,822 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 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 96% of its contemporaries.