» Articles » PMID: 23610383

Women's Responses to Information About Overdiagnosis in the UK Breast Cancer Screening Programme: a Qualitative Study

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2013 Apr 24
PMID 23610383
Citations 51
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To explore the influence of overdiagnosis information on women's decisions about mammography.

Design: A qualitative focus group study with purposive sampling and thematic analysis, in which overdiagnosis information was presented.

Setting: Community and university settings in London.

Participants: 40 women within the breast screening age range (50-71 years) including attenders and non-attenders were recruited using a recruitment agency as well as convenience sampling methods.

Results: Women expressed surprise at the possible extent of overdiagnosis and recognised the information as important, although many struggled to interpret the numerical data. Overdiagnosis was viewed as less-personally relevant than the possibility of 'under diagnosis' (false negatives), and often considered to be an issue for follow-up care decisions rather than screening participation. Women also expressed concern that information on overdiagnosis could deter others from attending screening, although they rarely saw it as a deterrent. After discussing overdiagnosis, few women felt that they would make different decisions about breast screening in the future.

Conclusions: Women regard it as important to be informed about overdiagnosis to get a complete picture of the risks and benefits of mammography, but the results of this study indicate that understanding overdiagnosis may not always influence women's attitudes towards participation in breast screening. The results also highlight the challenge of communicating the individual significance of information derived from population-level modelling.

Citing Articles

How Do Australians Manage Diagnostic Testing Risks? Focus Groups Linked to a Model of Behaviour Change.

Rozbroj T, Parker C, Haas R, Wallis J, Buchbinder R, OConnor D Health Expect. 2024; 27(5):e70038.

PMID: 39358972 PMC: 11447086. DOI: 10.1111/hex.70038.


Acceptability of de-intensified screening for women at low risk of breast cancer: a randomised online experimental survey.

Kelley-Jones C, Scott S, Waller J BMC Cancer. 2024; 24(1):1111.

PMID: 39243000 PMC: 11378402. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12847-w.


Risk-Adapted Breast Screening for Women at Low Predicted Risk of Breast Cancer: An Online Discrete Choice Experiment.

Kelley Jones C, Scott S, Pashayan N, Morris S, Okan Y, Waller J Med Decis Making. 2024; 44(5):586-600.

PMID: 38828503 PMC: 11283735. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X241254828.


Patient preferences for breast cancer screening: a systematic review update to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

Pillay J, Guitard S, Rahman S, Saba S, Rahman A, Bialy L Syst Rev. 2024; 13(1):140.

PMID: 38807191 PMC: 11134964. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02539-8.


Communicating the results of risk-based breast cancer screening through visualizations of risk: a participatory design approach.

van Strien-Knippenberg I, Arjangi-Babetti H, Timmermans D, Schrauwen L, Fransen M, Melles M BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2024; 24(1):78.

PMID: 38500098 PMC: 10949766. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-024-02483-6.


References
1.
Von Wagner C, Halligan S, Atkin W, Lilford R, Morton D, Wardle J . Choosing between CT colonography and colonoscopy in the diagnostic context: a qualitative study of influences on patient preferences. Health Expect. 2009; 12(1):18-26. PMC: 5060470. DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00520.x. View

2.
Engelman K, Cizik A, Ellerbeck E . Women's satisfaction with their mammography experience: results of a qualitative study. Women Health. 2006; 42(4):17-35. DOI: 10.1300/j013v42n04_02. View

3.
Duffy S, Tabar L, Olsen A, Vitak B, Allgood P, Chen T . Absolute numbers of lives saved and overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening, from a randomized trial and from the Breast Screening Programme in England. J Med Screen. 2010; 17(1):25-30. PMC: 3104821. DOI: 10.1258/jms.2009.009094. View

4.
Woolf S, Harris R . The harms of screening: new attention to an old concern. JAMA. 2012; 307(6):565-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.100. View

5.
Schwartz L, Woloshin S, Fowler Jr F, Welch H . Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA. 2004; 291(1):71-8. DOI: 10.1001/jama.291.1.71. View