Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Mar;19(1):35-41.
doi: 10.1258/jms.2012.011123.

Influence of false-positive mammography results on subsequent screening: do physician recommendations buffer negative effects?

Jessica T DeFrank  1 , Barbara K Rimer, J Michael Bowling, Jo Anne Earp, Erica S Breslau, Noel T Brewer
Affiliations

Influence of false-positive mammography results on subsequent screening: do physician recommendations buffer negative effects?

Jessica T DeFrank et al. J Med Screen. 2012 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: Cancer screening guidelines often include discussion about the unintended negative consequences of routine screening. This prospective study examined effects of false-positive mammography results on women's adherence to subsequent breast cancer screening and psychological well-being. We also assessed whether barriers to screening exacerbated the effects of false-positive results.

Methods: We conducted secondary analyses of data from telephone interviews and medical claims records for 2406 insured women. The primary outcome was adherence to screening guidelines, defined as adherent (10-14 months), delayed (15-34 months), or no subsequent mammogram on record.

Results: About 8% of women reported that their most recent screening mammograms produced false-positive results. In the absence of self-reported advice from their physicians to be screened, women were more likely to have no subsequent mammograms on record if they received false-positive results than if they received normal results (18% vs. 7%, OR = 3.17, 95% CI = 1.30, 7.70). Receipt of false-positive results was not associated with this outcome for women who said their physicians had advised regular screening in the past year (7% vs. 10%, OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.38, 1.45). False-positive results were associated with greater breast cancer worry (P < .01), thinking more about the benefits of screening (P < .001), and belief that abnormal test results do not mean women have cancer (P < .01), regardless of physicians' screening recommendations.

Conclusion: False-positive mammography results, coupled with reports that women's physicians did not advise regular screening, could lead to non-adherence to future screening. Abnormal mammograms that do not result in cancer diagnoses are opportunities for physicians to stress the importance of regular screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Data collection timing and source
Figure 2
Figure 2
Impact of false-positive mammogram results on subsequent screening
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, Polk S, Arena PJ, Fletcher SW. Ten-year risk of false-positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1089–96. - PubMed
    1. Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, Smith RA. Modelling the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening test. Stat Methods Med Res. 2010;19:429–49. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hofvind S, Thoresen S, Tretli S. The cumulative risk of a false-positive recall in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Cancer. 2004;101:1501–7. - PubMed
    1. Castells X, Molins E, Macia F. Cumulative false-positive recall rate and association with participant related factors in a population-based breast cancer screening programme. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60:316–21. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Njor SH, Olsen AH, Schwartz W, Vejborg I, Lynge E. Predicting the risk of a false-positive test for women following a mammography screening programme. J Med Screen. 2007;14:94–7. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms