We are analyzing https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/1472-6874-9-36.

Title:
Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study | BMC Women's Health
Description:
Background Overdiagnosis in cancer screening is the detection of cancer lesions that would otherwise not have been detected. It is arguably the most important harm. We quantified overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening programme, which is uniquely suited for this purpose, as only 20% of the Danish population has been offered organised mammography screening over a long time-period. Methods We collected incidence rates of carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer in areas with and without screening over 13 years with screening (1991-2003), and 20 years before its introduction (1971-1990). We explored the incidence increase comparing unadjusted incidence rates and used Poisson regression analysis to compensate for the background incidence trend, variation in age distribution and geographical variation in incidence. Results For the screened age group, 50 to 69 years, we found an overdiagnosis of 35% when we compared unadjusted incidence rates for the screened and non-screened areas, but after compensating for a small decline in incidence in older, previously screened women. Our adjusted Poisson regression analysis indicated a relative risk of 1.40 (95% CI: 1.35-1.45) for the whole screening period, and a potential compensatory drop in older women of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.96), yielding an overdiagnosis of 33%, which we consider the most reliable estimate. The drop in previously screened women was only present in one of the two screened regions and was small in absolute numbers. Discussion One in four breast cancers diagnosed in the screened age group in the Danish screening programme is overdiagnosed. Our estimate for Denmark is lower than that for comparable countries, likely because of lower uptake, lower recall rates and lower detection rates of carcinoma in situ.
Website Age:
28 years and 1 months (reg. 1997-05-29).

Matching Content Categories {📚}

Health & Fitness
Events
Movies

Content Management System {📝}

What CMS is link.springer.com built with?

Custom-built

No common CMS systems were detected on Link.springer.com, and no known web development framework was identified.

Traffic Estimate {📈}

What is the average monthly size of link.springer.com audience?

🌠 Phenomenal Traffic: 5M - 10M visitors per month

Based on our best estimate, this website will receive around 7,603,974 visitors per month in the current month.

check SE Ranking
check Ahrefs
check Similarweb
check Ubersuggest
check Semrush

How Does Link.springer.com Make Money? {💸}

We see no obvious way the site makes money.

Websites don't always need to be profitable; some serve as platforms for education or personal expression. Websites can serve multiple purposes. And this might be one of them. Link.springer.com might be making money, but it's not detectable how they're doing it.

Keywords {🔍}

screening, incidence, cancer, breast, women, years, age, screened, overdiagnosis, areas, group, mammography, cancers, rates, copenhagen, funen, article, drop, denmark, google, scholar, nonscreened, previously, table, pubmed, data, increase, regression, analysis, period, fig, expected, organised, aged, authors, danish, poisson, prescreening, increased, offered, trend, found, compensatory, opportunistic, cis, figure, extra, detection, detected, population,

Topics {✒️}

uk/breastscreen/breast-statistics-bulletin-2004-05 article download pdf lead-time models assume poisson regression analyses pre-publication history pre-screening incidence rates poisson regression analysis poisson regression model privacy choices/manage cookies lead-time disregard overdiagnosis cancer prevention breast cancer risk authors’ original file invasive breast cancer breast cancer surgery rivalling breast cancer breast cancer detected nat rev cancer breast cancer incidence linear regression analysis seek opportunistic screening von euler-chelpin full size image author information authors breast cancer screening nordic cochrane centre simple linear regression national cancer institute seer cancer registries danish cancer registry conservative analysis means early breast cancer organised programme covered invasive breast cancers mammography screening programmes breast cancer mortality organised screening programmes breast cancers detected fewer breast cancers breast screening program unadjusted incidence rates european economic area remaining life-span deliberately conservative attitude hormone replacement therapy arch intern med conditions privacy policy elevated incidence levels organised screening programme increasing background incidence

Questions {❓}

Croft E, Barratt A, Butow P: Information about tests for breast cancer: what are we telling people?
Jensen A, Olsen AH, von Euler-Chelpin M, Njor SH, Vejborg I, Lynge E: Do nonattenders in mammography screening programmes seek mammography elsewhere?
Svendsen AL, Olsen AH, von Euler-Chelpin M, Lynge E: Breast Cancer Incidence after the Introduction of Mammography Screening - What Should Be Expected?
Welch GH: Should I be tested for cancer?

Schema {🗺️}

WebPage:
      mainEntity:
         headline:Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
         description:Overdiagnosis in cancer screening is the detection of cancer lesions that would otherwise not have been detected. It is arguably the most important harm. We quantified overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening programme, which is uniquely suited for this purpose, as only 20% of the Danish population has been offered organised mammography screening over a long time-period. We collected incidence rates of carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer in areas with and without screening over 13 years with screening (1991-2003), and 20 years before its introduction (1971-1990). We explored the incidence increase comparing unadjusted incidence rates and used Poisson regression analysis to compensate for the background incidence trend, variation in age distribution and geographical variation in incidence. For the screened age group, 50 to 69 years, we found an overdiagnosis of 35% when we compared unadjusted incidence rates for the screened and non-screened areas, but after compensating for a small decline in incidence in older, previously screened women. Our adjusted Poisson regression analysis indicated a relative risk of 1.40 (95% CI: 1.35-1.45) for the whole screening period, and a potential compensatory drop in older women of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.96), yielding an overdiagnosis of 33%, which we consider the most reliable estimate. The drop in previously screened women was only present in one of the two screened regions and was small in absolute numbers. One in four breast cancers diagnosed in the screened age group in the Danish screening programme is overdiagnosed. Our estimate for Denmark is lower than that for comparable countries, likely because of lower uptake, lower recall rates and lower detection rates of carcinoma in situ.
         datePublished:2009-12-22T00:00:00Z
         dateModified:2009-12-22T00:00:00Z
         pageStart:1
         pageEnd:10
         license:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0
         sameAs:https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-9-36
         keywords:
            Breast Cancer
            Mammography Screening
            Breast Cancer Incidence
            Opportunistic Screening
            Poisson Regression Analysis
            Gynecology
            Maternal and Child Health
            Reproductive Medicine
         image:
            https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig1_HTML.jpg
            https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig2_HTML.jpg
            https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig3_HTML.jpg
            https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig4_HTML.jpg
         isPartOf:
            name:BMC Women's Health
            issn:
               1472-6874
            volumeNumber:9
            type:
               Periodical
               PublicationVolume
         publisher:
            name:BioMed Central
            logo:
               url:https://www.springernature.com/app-sn/public/images/logo-springernature.png
               type:ImageObject
            type:Organization
         author:
               name:Karsten J Jørgensen
               affiliation:
                     name:Rigshospitalet
                     address:
                        name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
                        type:PostalAddress
                     type:Organization
               email:[email protected]
               type:Person
               name:Per-Henrik Zahl
               affiliation:
                     name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health
                     address:
                        name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Nydalen, Norway
                        type:PostalAddress
                     type:Organization
               type:Person
               name:Peter C Gøtzsche
               affiliation:
                     name:Rigshospitalet
                     address:
                        name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
                        type:PostalAddress
                     type:Organization
               type:Person
         isAccessibleForFree:1
         type:ScholarlyArticle
      context:https://schema.org
ScholarlyArticle:
      headline:Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study
      description:Overdiagnosis in cancer screening is the detection of cancer lesions that would otherwise not have been detected. It is arguably the most important harm. We quantified overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening programme, which is uniquely suited for this purpose, as only 20% of the Danish population has been offered organised mammography screening over a long time-period. We collected incidence rates of carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer in areas with and without screening over 13 years with screening (1991-2003), and 20 years before its introduction (1971-1990). We explored the incidence increase comparing unadjusted incidence rates and used Poisson regression analysis to compensate for the background incidence trend, variation in age distribution and geographical variation in incidence. For the screened age group, 50 to 69 years, we found an overdiagnosis of 35% when we compared unadjusted incidence rates for the screened and non-screened areas, but after compensating for a small decline in incidence in older, previously screened women. Our adjusted Poisson regression analysis indicated a relative risk of 1.40 (95% CI: 1.35-1.45) for the whole screening period, and a potential compensatory drop in older women of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.96), yielding an overdiagnosis of 33%, which we consider the most reliable estimate. The drop in previously screened women was only present in one of the two screened regions and was small in absolute numbers. One in four breast cancers diagnosed in the screened age group in the Danish screening programme is overdiagnosed. Our estimate for Denmark is lower than that for comparable countries, likely because of lower uptake, lower recall rates and lower detection rates of carcinoma in situ.
      datePublished:2009-12-22T00:00:00Z
      dateModified:2009-12-22T00:00:00Z
      pageStart:1
      pageEnd:10
      license:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0
      sameAs:https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-9-36
      keywords:
         Breast Cancer
         Mammography Screening
         Breast Cancer Incidence
         Opportunistic Screening
         Poisson Regression Analysis
         Gynecology
         Maternal and Child Health
         Reproductive Medicine
      image:
         https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig1_HTML.jpg
         https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig2_HTML.jpg
         https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig3_HTML.jpg
         https://media.springernature.com/lw1200/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6874-9-36/MediaObjects/12905_2009_Article_177_Fig4_HTML.jpg
      isPartOf:
         name:BMC Women's Health
         issn:
            1472-6874
         volumeNumber:9
         type:
            Periodical
            PublicationVolume
      publisher:
         name:BioMed Central
         logo:
            url:https://www.springernature.com/app-sn/public/images/logo-springernature.png
            type:ImageObject
         type:Organization
      author:
            name:Karsten J Jørgensen
            affiliation:
                  name:Rigshospitalet
                  address:
                     name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
                     type:PostalAddress
                  type:Organization
            email:[email protected]
            type:Person
            name:Per-Henrik Zahl
            affiliation:
                  name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health
                  address:
                     name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Nydalen, Norway
                     type:PostalAddress
                  type:Organization
            type:Person
            name:Peter C Gøtzsche
            affiliation:
                  name:Rigshospitalet
                  address:
                     name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
                     type:PostalAddress
                  type:Organization
            type:Person
      isAccessibleForFree:1
["Periodical","PublicationVolume"]:
      name:BMC Women's Health
      issn:
         1472-6874
      volumeNumber:9
Organization:
      name:BioMed Central
      logo:
         url:https://www.springernature.com/app-sn/public/images/logo-springernature.png
         type:ImageObject
      name:Rigshospitalet
      address:
         name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
         type:PostalAddress
      name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health
      address:
         name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Nydalen, Norway
         type:PostalAddress
      name:Rigshospitalet
      address:
         name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
         type:PostalAddress
ImageObject:
      url:https://www.springernature.com/app-sn/public/images/logo-springernature.png
Person:
      name:Karsten J Jørgensen
      affiliation:
            name:Rigshospitalet
            address:
               name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
               type:PostalAddress
            type:Organization
      email:[email protected]
      name:Per-Henrik Zahl
      affiliation:
            name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health
            address:
               name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Nydalen, Norway
               type:PostalAddress
            type:Organization
      name:Peter C Gøtzsche
      affiliation:
            name:Rigshospitalet
            address:
               name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
               type:PostalAddress
            type:Organization
PostalAddress:
      name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
      name:Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Nydalen, Norway
      name:The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark

External Links {🔗}(91)

Analytics and Tracking {📊}

Google Tag Manager

Libraries {📚}

Clipboard.js
Prism.js

CDN Services {📦}

Crossref

4.9s.

LINK . SPRINGER . COM {}