How do women experience a false-positive test result from breast screening? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
This is the first review to identify, appraise and synthesise women's experiences of having a false-positive breast screening test result.Methods
We systematically searched eight databases for qualitative research reporting women's experiences of receiving a false-positive screening test result. Two reviewers independently screened articles. Eight papers reporting seven studies were included. Study quality was appraised. Data were thematically synthesised.Results
Women passively attended screening in order to prove their perceived good health. Consequently, being recalled was unexpected, shocking and disempowering: women felt without options. They endured great uncertainty and stress and sought clarity about their health (e.g. by scrutinising the wording of recall letters and conversations with healthcare professionals). Their result was accompanied by relief and welcome feelings of certainty about their health, but some received unclear explanations of their result, contributing to lasting breast cancer-related worry and an ongoing need for further reassurance.Conclusion
The organisation of breast screening programmes may constrain choice for women: they became passive recipients. The way healthcare professionals verbally communicate results to women may contribute to lasting breast cancer-related worry. Women need more reassurance, emotional support and answers to their questions before and during screening assessment, and after receiving their result.
SUBMITTER: Long H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6738040 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:False positive results in screening tests have potentially severe psychological, medical, and financial consequences for the recipient. However, there have been few efforts to quantify how the risk of a false positive accumulates over time. We seek to fill this gap by estimating the probability that an individual who adheres to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) screening guidelines will receive at least one false positive in a lifetime. To do so, we assembled a data set of 116 studies cited by the USPSTF that report the number of true positives, false negatives, true negatives, and false positives for the primary screening procedure for one of five cancers or six sexually transmitted diseases. We use these data to estimate the probability that an individual in one of 14 demographic subpopulations will receive at least one false positive for one of these eleven diseases in a lifetime. We specify a suitable statistical model to account for the hierarchical structure of the data, and we use the parametric bootstrap to quantify the uncertainty surrounding our estimates. The estimated probability of receiving at least one false positive in a lifetime is 85.5% (±0.9%) and 38.9% (±3.6%) for baseline groups of women and men, respectively. It is higher for subpopulations recommended to screen more frequently than the baseline, including more vulnerable groups such as pregnant women and men who have sex with men. Since screening technology is imperfect, false positives remain inevitable. The high lifetime risk of a false positive reveals the importance of educating patients about this phenomenon.
| S-EPMC9931091 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We describe a case in which the Histoplasma capsulatum AccuProbe test displayed cross-reactivity with a respiratory isolate thought to be Histoplasma but not morphologically consistent with H. capsulatum. The isolate was later identified as the Chrysosporium anamorph of Nannizziopsis vriesii by sequence analysis and phenotypic data.
| S-EPMC1081288 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SettingParticipants with a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) have a high risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. They are therefore recommended follow-up by colonoscopy. However, more than ten percent of positively screened persons do not adhere to this advice.ObjectiveTo investigate FIT-positive individuals' motives for non-adherence to colonoscopy advice in the Dutch CRC screening program.SubjectsNon-adherent FIT-positive participants of the Dutch CRC screening program.DesignWe conducted semi structured in-depth interviews with 17 persons who did not undergo colonoscopy within 6 months after a positive FIT. Interviews were undertaken face-to-face and data were analysed thematically with open coding and constant comparison.ResultsAll participants had multifactorial motives for non-adherence. A preference for more personalised care was described with the following themes: aversion against the design of the screening program, expectations of personalised care, emotions associated with experiences of impersonal care and a desire for counselling where options other than colonoscopy could be discussed. Furthermore, intrinsic motives were: having a perception of low risk for CRC (described by all participants), aversion and fear of colonoscopy, distrust, reluctant attitude to the treatment of cancer and cancer fatalism. Extrinsic motives were: having other health issues or priorities, practical barriers, advice from a general practitioner (GP) and financial reasons.ConclusionPersonalised screening counselling might have helped to improve the interviewees' experiences with the screening program as well as their knowledge on CRC and CRC screening. Future studies should explore whether personalised screening counselling also has potential to increase adherence rates. Key points Participants with a positive FIT in two-step colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs are at high risk for colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas. Non-adherence after an unfavourable screening result happens in all CRC programs worldwide with the consequence that many of the participants do not undergo colonoscopy for the definitive assessment of the presence of colorectal cancer. Little qualitative research has been done to study the reasons why individuals participate in the first step of the screening but not in the second step. We found a preference for more personalised care, which was not reported in previous literature on this subject. Furthermore, intrinsic factors, such as a low risk perception and distrust, and extrinsic factors, such as the presence of other health issues and GP advice, may also play a role in non-adherence. A person-centred approach in the form of a screening counselling session may be beneficial for this group of CRC screening participants.
| S-EPMC7781896 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Newborn screening was implemented in the 1960s with screening for phenylketonuria (PKU). In the same decade, it became possible to screen for classical galactosemia, a rare autosomal recessive inherited disorder, which is potentially life threatening if not treated. While newborn screening for PKU has become almost universal, galactosemia is included only in a minority of European newborn screening programs. The major arguments why galactosemia is excluded from newborn screening programs are that the disease can be diagnosed clinically, there is a high rate of false positives and long-term complications are common despite early diagnosis.Here, we report how we have decreased the number of false-positive galactosemia recalls to less than 0.01%, using a two-tier test strategy. All samples are tested with the Beutler blood spot test, a method that measures galactose-1-phosphate uridyltransferase activity. Samples with less than ?15% activity are tested for galactose with a galactose dehydrogenase test (the rapid GAL-DH test), which catalyzes the oxidation of galactose and the reduction of NAD(+) to NADH that is estimated visually by fluorescence under UV-light. Both tests are semiquantitative.With this strategy, screening for galactosemia is inexpensive, does not demand a heavy workload, and has a low false-positive re-call rate. The incidence of classical galactosemia in Sweden is 1/100,000, which is lower than the reported incidence in other European countries. Despite this, newborn screening for galactosemia has never been questioned. Concise sentence: Screening for galactosemia using well-established methods to reduce the false-positive rate.
| S-EPMC3509849 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClassic galactosemia (CG) is a potentially lethal genetic disorder that results from profound loss of galactose-1-phosphate uridylyltransferase (GALT). CG is detected by newborn screening (NBS) in many countries; however, conclusive diagnosis can be complex due to broad and overlapping ranges of GALT activity. Molecular studies can also be complex due to allelic heterogeneity at the GALT locus.MethodsWe conducted both biochemical and molecular follow-up studies for an infant flagged by NBS for possible galactosemia. To clarify the diagnosis we also conducted biochemical and RNA studies of lymphoblasts prepared from the child and one parent.ResultsWe identified a novel noncoding GALT variant, c.377+17C>T, that was homozygous in the child and heterozygous in both parents. The child and both parents also showed diminished GALT activity in red blood cells, and transformed lymphoblasts from the child and one parent further showed diminished GALT activity. However, qRT-PCR studies demonstrated apparently normal GALT mRNA levels in lymphoblasts, and Gal-1P values measured in the child following galactose exposure in infancy and at 1 year were normal.ConclusionsThese results highlight the existence of rare but apparently benign variants in GALT and underscore the need for functional studies to distinguish pathogenic from benign variants.
| S-EPMC4449829 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHuman papillomavirus testing as an established screenings test allow for the early detection and treatment of cervical cancer. Testing positive for HPV may have adverse consequences for women. This study aimed to explore the psychological impacts of testing positive for HPV on women in a developing country with a distinct cultural and religious background.MethodsQualitative face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with 40 Iranian women who received a positive high-risk HPV result. Content analysis approach was used to data analysis through MAXQDA10.ResultsThree main categories were emerged: initial confrontation; STD-related psychological burden; and rebuilding health. Initial reactions to positive HPV results were shock, unrealistic fear, confusion, distress, and financial concerns. Stigma was manifested in form of self-blame, fear of HPV-disclosure, negative body image, being stigmatized by healthcare providers, and receiving health care anonymously. Refusal to use insurance services showed how evident and powerful the stigma was. Most women reported lifestyles and sexual behaviors modifications to help their immune system to clear HPV; indicating that the screening can work as a valuable opportunity to improve women's physical and sexual health. Regular follow-up, safe sex and a focus on spirituality enable women infected with HPV to take control of the situation. Worrying about other HPV-linked cancers (oropharynx and anal) and fears of partner infection indicated that women consider HPV to be more than just a cause of cervical cancer.ConclusionsThe findings implied to the HPV-positive women's need to support and factual information. Designing and implementing interventions that mitigate the psychological effect of positive HPV test results can highlight the potential benefits of screening for women's health.
| S-EPMC7995699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo gain an understanding of the views of women with false-positive screening mammograms of screening recall services, their ideas for service improvements and how these compare with current UK guidelines.MethodsInductive qualitative content analysis of semistructured interviews of 21 women who had false-positive screening mammograms. These were then compared with UK National Health Service (NHS) guidelines.ResultsParticipants' concerns about mammography screening recall services focused on issues of communication and choice. Many of the issues raised indicated that the 1998 NHS Breast Screening Programme guidelines on improving the quality of written information sent to women who are recalled, had not been fully implemented. This included being told a clear reason for recall, who may attend with them, the length of appointment, who they will see and what tests will be carried out. Additionally women voiced a need for: reassurance that a swift appointment did not imply they had cancer; choice about invasive assessment or watchful waiting; the offer of a follow-up mammogram for those uncertain about the validity of their all-clear and an extension of the role of the clinical nurse specialist, outlined in the 2012 NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) guidelines, to include availability at the clinic after the all-clear for women with false-positive mammograms.ConclusionsIt is time the NHSBSP 1998 recall information guidelines were fully implemented. Additionally, the further suggestions from this research, including extending the role of the clinical nurses from the 2012 NHSBSP guidelines, should be considered. These actions have the potential to reduce the anxiety of being recalled.
| S-EPMC4316556 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Our aim was to investigate whether receiving a false positive (FP) cervical cytology result affected subsequent cervical cancer screening participation. This Danish nationwide register-based cohort study included 502,380 women aged 22.5-45 attending cervical cancer screening in 2012-2014 with a normal (n = 501,003) or FP (n = 1,377) cytology screening result. A FP result was defined as a cervical cytology showing high grade cytological abnormalities followed by a normal or 'Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 1' biopsy result. Women were categorized as subsequent participants if they had a cervical cytology within 24-42 months after their last screening or surveillance test. We compared subsequent participation among women with a normal versus a FP result, using odds ratios including 95% confidence intervals. Participation was slightly higher among women with FP results than among women with normal results (71.5% vs. 69.2%, p = 0.058). After adjustment for age and screening history, women with FP results participated significantly more than women with normal results (OR: 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.35). Women receiving a FP result did not participate less in subsequent cervical cancer screening than women receiving a normal result. In fact, the use of opportunistic screening seemed to be increased among women receiving a FP result.
| S-EPMC7508879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceFalse-positive mammography results are common. However, long-term outcomes after a false-positive result remain unclear.ObjectivesTo examine long-term outcomes after a false-positive mammography result and to investigate whether the association of a false-positive mammography result with cancer differs by baseline characteristics, tumor characteristics, and time since the false-positive result.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based, matched cohort study was conducted in Sweden from January 1, 1991, to March 31, 2020. It included 45 213 women who received a first false-positive mammography result between 1991 and 2017 and 452 130 controls matched on age, calendar year of mammography, and screening history (no previous false-positive result). The study also included 1113 women with a false-positive result and 11 130 matched controls with information on mammographic breast density from the Karolinska Mammography Project for Risk Prediction of Breast Cancer study. Statistical analysis was performed from April 2022 to February 2023.ExposureA false-positive mammography result.Main outcomes and measuresBreast cancer incidence and mortality.ResultsThe study cohort included 497 343 women (median age, 52 years [IQR, 42-59 years]). The 20-year cumulative incidence of breast cancer was 11.3% (95% CI, 10.7%-11.9%) among women with a false-positive result vs 7.3% (95% CI, 7.2%-7.5%) among those without, with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.61 (95% CI, 1.54-1.68). The corresponding HRs were higher among women aged 60 to 75 years at the examination (HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.80-2.26) and those with lower mammographic breast density (HR, 4.65; 95% CI, 2.61-8.29). In addition, breast cancer risk was higher for women who underwent a biopsy at the recall (HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.63-1.92) than for those without a biopsy (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.43-1.60). Cancers after a false-positive result were more likely to be detected on the ipsilateral side of the false-positive result (HR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.81-2.04) and were more common during the first 4 years of follow-up (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 2.33-2.85 during the first 2 years; HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.76-2.12 at >2 to 4 years). No statistical difference was found for different tumor characteristics (except for larger tumor size). Furthermore, associated with the increased risk of breast cancer, women with a false-positive result had an 84% higher rate of breast cancer death than those without (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.57-2.15).Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that the risk of developing breast cancer after a false-positive mammography result differs by individual characteristics and follow-up. These findings can be used to develop individualized risk-based breast cancer screening after a false-positive result.
| S-EPMC10623302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Salmonella monitoring program, as outlined in the EU Commission regulation 200/2010, asks for repeated sampling in order to ascertain progress in achievement of the EU target. According to Article 2.2.2.2.c of this regulation, the competent authority may decide to do a resample and retest when it has reasons to question the results of initial testing. In the Netherlands, the competent authorities have been resampling and retesting all initial positive samplings for several years because of doubts about false positive initial test results. An analysis of population data in the period 2015-2019 indicates that 48% of initial samplings at the farm were classified as false positive after resampling and retesting by the competent authorities. A qualitative analysis, assessing factors that could be associated with the occurrence of false positives, indicates that cross-contamination during the sampling process by the poultry farmer is probably the most likely source. Cross-contamination of samples during transport from the farm to the laboratory and/or cross-contamination at the laboratory are also considered possible sources. Given the slightly non-optimal system-specificity of the Salmonella monitoring program, there is good reason to make, or consider, standard resampling and retesting of initial positive results by the competent veterinary authorities possible within the EU.
| S-EPMC8620518 | biostudies-literature