Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Does individual programme size affect screening performance? Results from the United Kingdom NHS breast screening

R G Blanks1, R L Bennett, M G Wallis

  • 1Cancer Screening Evaluation Unit, Block D, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5NG, UK. r.blanks@icr.ac.uk

Journal of Medical Screening
|April 12, 2002
PubMed
Summary

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

An optoacoustic imaging feature set to characterise blood vessels surrounding benign and malignant breast lesions.

Photoacoustics·2022
Same author

Outcomes of male patients attending the symptomatic breast unit: adherence to local and national imaging guidelines and effectiveness of clinical examination and imaging in detecting male breast cancer.

Clinical radiology·2021
Same author

An analysis of screen-detected invasive cancers by grade in the English breast cancer screening programme: are we failing to detect sufficient small grade 3 cancers?

European radiology·2020
Same author

Correction to: An analysis of 11.3 million screening tests examining the association between recall and cancer detection rates in the English NHS breast cancer screening programme.

European radiology·2019
Same author

Evidence for avoiding the biopsy of typical fibroadenomas in women aged 25-29 years.

Clinical radiology·2019
Same author

Final Results of the Prospective FH02 Mammographic Surveillance Study of Women Aged 35-39 at Increased Familial Risk of Breast Cancer.

EClinicalMedicine·2019

Smaller breast screening programs detect fewer cancers and have lower detection rates. However, their impact on national cancer detection rates is minimal due to lower screening volumes. Identifying performance issues in small programs is challenging.

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Radiology
  • Screening Program Evaluation

Background:

  • The National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) comprises 95 individual programs with significant variations in size.
  • Program size, defined by the number of women screened, can differ by a factor of ten.
  • Understanding the relationship between program size and performance is crucial for optimizing breast cancer screening outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of screening program size on the performance of individual National Health Service Breast Screening Programmes (NHSBSPs).
  • To evaluate whether smaller programs exhibit different performance metrics compared to medium and large programs.

Main Methods:

  • Data from 95 UK screening programs over five years (1995-2000) were analyzed.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Programs were categorized into small (bottom 25%), medium (middle 50%), and large (top 25%) based on screening volume.
  • Performance was assessed using cancer detection rates, referral rates, and positive predictive value (PPV).

    • Main Results:

    • Smaller NHS breast screening programs demonstrated marginally poorer performance, detecting fewer cancers and having a lower PPV.
    • The invasive cancer detection rate in the smallest 25% of programs was 13% lower than in medium and large programs.
    • Improving detection rates in small programs would only marginally increase the national detection rate (approx. 2%) due to lower screening volumes.

    Conclusions:

    • While smaller programs show poorer performance, the reasons remain unclear from this study.
    • Larger programs may have performance issues more easily identified by quality assurance staff.
    • The small number of cancers detected in smaller programs makes performance issues difficult to identify and address effectively.