US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey

Abstract Objective: To determine women's attitudes to and knowledge of both false positive mammography results and the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ after screening mammograph. Design: Cross sectional survey. Setting: United States. Participants: 479 women aged 18–97 years who did not report a history of breast cancer. Main outcome measures: Attitudes to and knowledge of false positive results and the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ after screening mammography. Results: Women were aware that false positive results do occur. Their median estimate of the false positive rate for 10 years of annual screening was 20% (25th percentile estimate, 10%; 75th percentile estimate, 45%). The women were highly tolerant of false positives: 63% thought that 500 or more false positives per life saved was reasonable and 37% would tolerate 10 000 or more. Women who had had a false positive result (n=76) expressed the same high tolerance: 39% would tolerate 10 000 or more false positives. 62% of women did not want to take false positive results into account when deciding about screening. Only 8% of women thought that mammography could harm a woman without breast cancer, and 94% doubted the possibility of non-progressive breast cancers. Few had heard about ductal carcinoma in situ, a cancer that may not progress, but when informed, 60% of women wanted to take into account the possibility of it being detected when deciding about screening. Conclusions: Women are aware of false positives and seem to view them as an acceptable consequence of screening mammography. In contrast, most women are unaware that screening can detect cancers that may never progress but feel that such information would be relevant. Education should perhaps focus less on false positives and more on the less familiar outcome of detection of ductal carcinoma in situ.

[1]  B Fischhoff,et al.  A New Scale for Assessing Perceptions of Chance , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[2]  Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.  Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? , 2000, The Lancet.

[3]  D. Miller,et al.  Trends in self-reported use of mammograms (1989-1997) and Papanicolaou tests (1991-1997)--Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. , 1999, MMWR. CDC surveillance summaries : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. CDC surveillance summaries.

[4]  S. Fletcher False-Positive Screening Mammograms: Good News, but More To Do , 1999, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[5]  J. Elmore,et al.  Effect of False-Positive Mammograms on Interval Breast Cancer Screening in a Health Maintenance Organization , 1999, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[6]  J. Elmore,et al.  Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  D. Ransohoff,et al.  Lessons from the Mammography Screening Controversy: Can We Improve the Debate? , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[8]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. , 1996, JAMA.

[9]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Incidence of and treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. , 1996, JAMA.

[10]  E. Jonsson,et al.  Neglected aspects of false positive findings of mammography in breast cancer screening: analysis of false positive cases from the Stockholm trial , 1996, BMJ.

[11]  W. Dupont,et al.  Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15–25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy , 1995, Cancer.

[12]  S. Sutton,et al.  Does routine screening for breast cancer raise anxiety? Results from a three wave prospective study in England. , 1995, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[13]  K. Donelan,et al.  How white and African Americans view their health and social problems. Different experiences, different expectations. , 1995, JAMA.

[14]  S. Rubin,et al.  Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. , 1995, JAMA.

[15]  P. Blackman Actual causes of death in the United States. , 1994, JAMA.

[16]  McGinnis Jm,et al.  Actual causes of death in the United States. , 1993 .

[17]  David Haber,et al.  Guide to clinical preventive services: a challenge to physician resourcefulness , 1993 .

[18]  S. Wall,et al.  Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials , 1993, The Lancet.

[19]  B. Trock,et al.  Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. , 1991, Annals of internal medicine.

[20]  I. Gram,et al.  Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. , 1990, British Journal of Cancer.

[21]  S. Moss,et al.  Psychiatric morbidity associated with screening for breast cancer. , 1989, British Journal of Cancer.

[22]  F. J. Fowler,et al.  Survey Research Methods , 1984 .

[23]  L. Kann,et al.  Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance--National Alternative High School Youth Risk Behavior Survey, United States, 1998. , 1999, MMWR. CDC surveillance summaries : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. CDC surveillance summaries.

[24]  H. Welch,et al.  Using Autopsy Series To Estimate the Disease Reservoir for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast: How Much More Breast Cancer Can We Find? , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[25]  V. Ernster,et al.  Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma. , 1997, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[26]  B. Trock,et al.  Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening. , 1991, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[27]  D. Commerce Statistical abstract of the United States , 1978 .