{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,25]],"date-time":"2026-09-25T08:59:37Z","timestamp":1790326777234,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":28,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"7","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2004,8,23]],"date-time":"2004-08-23T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1093219200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Cancer"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2004,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>BACKGROUND<\/jats:title><jats:p>Biennial breast cancer screening for women ages 50\u201369 years is recommended by the World Health Organization. It has been claimed that the cumulative risk of a false\u2010positive recall is a significant disadvantage in breast cancer screening programs. The primary objective of this study was to estimate the cumulative risk of a false\u2010positive recall during a screening period of 20 years in women ages 50\u201351 years who are screened biennially in a population\u2010based screening program. A secondary objective was to estimate the cumulative risk of undergoing fine\u2010needle aspiration cytology, core needle biopsy, and open biopsy with benign morphology in the same group of women.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS<\/jats:title><jats:p>The Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program invites all women ages 50\u201369 years who reside in the country to a 2\u2010view mammography biennially. A nationwide data base that covers all of the invited women includes individual information about all screening activity. Results from three screening rounds in four counties were the basis for this study. False\u2010positive recalls due to abnormal mammograms among 83,416 women who participated all the 3 screening rounds were the basis for the estimations.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS<\/jats:title><jats:p>It was calculated that women ages 50\u201351 years who participate in biennial screening run a cumulative risk of 20.8% for a false\u2010positive recall during a screening period of 2 decades. The cumulative risk of undergoing fine\u2010needle aspiration cytology was estimated at 3.9%, and the risk of undergoing core needle biopsy or open biopsy with benign morphology was 1.5% and 0.9%, respectively.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS<\/jats:title><jats:p>False\u2010positive recalls are a disadvantage in a breast cancer screening programs, but the cumulative risk seemed to be acceptable in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. It is important to communicate the existence and extent of this risk to the target group. Cancer 2004. \u00a9 2004 American Cancer Society.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.20528","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2004,8,23]],"date-time":"2004-08-23T15:26:58Z","timestamp":1093274818000},"page":"1501-1507","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":84,"title":["The cumulative risk of a false\u2010positive recall in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"101","author":[{"given":"Solveig","family":"Hofvind","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Steinar","family":"Thoresen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Steinar","family":"Tretli","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2004,9,17]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_5_2_2","series-title":"IARC handbook of cancer prevention","volume-title":"breast cancer screening","author":"Vainio H","year":"2002"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(03)13143-1"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(03)13132-7"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/jncimono\/1997.22.131"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/(SICI)1097-0142(19990301)85:5<1114::AID-CNCR15>3.0.CO;2-Y"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1054\/brst.2000.0177"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/pubmed\/23.4.292"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-131-1-199907060-00002"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/92.20.1657"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.177.3.1770543"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.158.3.1310825"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJM199804163381601"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJM199808203390812"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJM199808203390812"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_16_2","first-page":"561","article-title":"False positive rate of screening mammography","volume":"339","author":"Roux S","year":"1998","journal-title":"N Engl J Med."},{"key":"e_1_2_5_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-111-5-389"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_18_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1008999403069"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_19_2","volume-title":"Kvalitetsmanual i Mammografiprogrammet","author":"Ertzaas AK","year":"2003"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_20_2","volume-title":"European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening","author":"Perry N","year":"2001"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_21_2","first-page":"1","article-title":"Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen, April 1991\u2013March 1997","volume":"83","author":"Lynge E","year":"1998","journal-title":"APMIS."},{"key":"e_1_2_5_22_2","first-page":"561","article-title":"False positive rate of screening mammography","volume":"339","author":"Sickles EA","year":"1998","journal-title":"N Engl J Med."},{"key":"e_1_2_5_23_2","first-page":"562","article-title":"False positive rate of screening mammography","volume":"339","author":"Gross TL","year":"1998","journal-title":"N Engl J Med."},{"key":"e_1_2_5_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.290.16.2129"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-3-11"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_26_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/bcr455"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_27_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/jms.8.3.145"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_28_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0959-8049(00)00426-3"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_29_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"52","DOI":"10.1258\/rsmacta.41.1.52","article-title":"Effect on sensitivity and specificity of mammography screening with or without comparison of old mammograms","volume":"41","author":"Thurfjell MG","year":"2000","journal-title":"Acta Radiol."}],"container-title":["Cancer"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fcncr.20528","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/cncr.20528","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,12]],"date-time":"2025-10-12T09:18:56Z","timestamp":1760260736000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/cncr.20528"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2004,9,17]]},"references-count":28,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2004,10]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/cncr.20528"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/cncr.20528","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0008-543X","1097-0142"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0008-543X","type":"print"},{"value":"1097-0142","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2004,9,17]]}}}