BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Law, J
Right arrow Articles by Faulkner, K
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Law, J
Right arrow Articles by Faulkner, K
British Journal of Radiology 75 (2002),889-894 © 2002 The British Institute of Radiology

Full paper

Two-view screening and extending the age range: the balance of benefit and risk

J Law, PhD 1 and K Faulkner, PhD 2

1 Edinburgh University Department of Medical Physics, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU and 2 Quality Assurance Reference Centre, Newcastle General Hospital, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE4 6BE, UK

The UK Breast Screening Programme intends to introduce two-view screening on all screening rounds, and also to extend the normal screening age range at its upper end from the present 64 years to 70 years. The implications of these changes for cancer detection:induction ratios and for benefit/risk ratios are discussed. It is shown that both ratios remain much greater than 1.0 at all screening ages. This is also true for younger women, subject to provisos regarding starting ages for annual screening as described in previous papers. The requirements for optimization in a breast screening programme are also discussed. It is suggested that benefit (rather than the benefit/risk ratio) should be maximized provided that benefit exceeds risk.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
K. Faulkner
Ethical concerns arising from screening procedures such as mammography and self-referral
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, July 1, 2009; 135(2): 90 - 94.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
C. J. Martin
RADIATION DOSIMETRY FOR DIAGNOSTIC MEDICAL EXPOSURES
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, March 28, 2008; (2008) ncm495v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
E. Samei, R. S. Saunders Jr, J. A. Baker, and D. M. Delong
Digital Mammography: Effects of Reduced Radiation Dose on Diagnostic Performance
Radiology, May 1, 2007; 243(2): 396 - 404.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
J Law, K Faulkner, and K C Young
Risk factors for induction of breast cancer by X-rays and their implications for breast screening
Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2007; 80(952): 261 - 266.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
G J Heyes, A J Mill, and M W Charles
Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme.
Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2006; 79(939): 195 - 200.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
K. Faulkner and K. Bennison
An assessment of digital stereotaxis in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 327 - 329.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
K. Faulkner and J. Law
Mammographic breast cancer screening for women previously treated with high breast doses for diseases such as Hodgkin's
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 330 - 333.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
J Law
Breast dose from magnification films in mammography
Br. J. Radiol., September 1, 2005; 78(933): 816 - 820.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2002 by the British Institute of Radiology.