The full content of Annals is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >
Ideas and Opinions |

Lessons from the Mammography Screening Controversy: Can We Improve the Debate?

David F. Ransohoff, MD; and Russell P. Harris, MD, MPH
[+] Article, Author, and Disclosure Information

From the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Requests for Reprints: David F. Ransohoff, MD, CB #7105, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7105. Current Author Addresses: Dr. Ransohoff: CB #7105, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7105.

Copyright ©2004 by the American College of Physicians

Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):1029-1034. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-127-11-199712010-00016
Text Size: A A A

The debate about breast cancer screening for women in their 40s has become so contentious that effective communication and rational discussion on this topic have been compromised.This contentiousness might be defused by understanding the reasons for it. The debate is less about facts than it is about perceptions and values. There is disagreement about how to fairly describe facts about risk and how to avoid misperceptions that may distort assessment of risk. Other sources of disagreement concern the potential harms of screening, the relative roles of physicians and patients in decision making, and how to factor cost into screening decisions. The entire decision-making process has also been highly charged by single-issue advocacy groups and a kind of gender rivalry.

Several approaches might help defuse the debate and improve discussion.First, those on both sides of the debate might agree on several things: 1) that the evidence from clinical trials is widely agreed-upon and thus that a main task now is to factor in the values of individual women who are making decisions; 2) that the values of women may differ substantially and that those differences should be respected; 3) that both individuals and the public should be fully and fairly informed about the pros and cons of screening; and 4) that cost-effectiveness should at least be considered during the decision-making process. Lessons from this debate may apply to other medical problems that have small degrees of risk and whose management is strongly debated.





Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).


Submit a Comment/Letter
Submit a Comment/Letter

Summary for Patients

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.


Buy Now for $32.00

to gain full access to the content and tools.

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Related Articles
Related Point of Care
Topic Collections
PubMed Articles
Forgot your password?
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.