Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography

John Brodersen and Volkert Dirk Siersma
The Annals of Family Medicine March 2013, 11 (2) 106-115; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1466
John Brodersen
Research Unit and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: john.brodersen@sund.ku.dk
Volkert Dirk Siersma
Research Unit and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    The distribution of screening results and final diagnosis among the eligible women and these women’s response rates at 5 time points: baseline, 1, 6, 18, and 36 months.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    The mean score of each of the 8 psychosocial outcomes, part I of the COS-BC for the 3 screening groups at 5 time points: 0, 1, 6, 18, and 36 months.

    COS-BC = Consequences of Screening in Breast Cancer.

  • Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3

    The mean score of each of the 4 psychosocial outcomes, part II of the COS-BC for 2 or 3 of the screening groups at 4 time points: 1, 6, 18, and 36 months.

    COS-BC = Consequences of Screening in Breast Cancer.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Baseline Characteristics of the Screened Population

    Screening Result
    CharacteristicTotal No. (%)Normal No. (%)False-Positive No. (%)Breast Cancer No. (%))P Value
    Participants, No.1,310864272174
    Age, ya
      50–54367 (28.0)217 (25.1)112 (41.2)38 (21.8)<.001
      55–59415 (31.7)310 (35.9)66 (24.3)39 (22.4)
      60–64303 (23.1)210 (24.3)48 (17.7)45 (25.9)
      ≥65225 (17.2)127 (14.7)46 (16.9)52 (29.9)
    Living alone, No.847264168
      No922 (72.1)611 (72.1)186 (70.5)125 (74.4).671
      Yes357 (27.9)236 (27.9)78 (29.5)43 (25.6)
    Employment, No.845264168
      Workingb696 (54.5)467 (55.3)147 (55.7)82 (48.8).298
      Unemployed51 (4.0)38 (4.5)8 (3.0)5 (3.0)
      Pensioned530 (41.5)340 (40.2)109 (41.3)81 (48.2)
    Social status, No.847263168
      I42 (3.3)32 (3.8)5 (1.9)5 (3.0).398
      II188 (14.7)128 (15.1)41 (15.6)19 (11.3)
      III251 (19.6)165 (19.5)53 (20.2)33 (19.6)
      IV461 (36.1)312 (36.8)94 (35.7)55 (32.7)
      V336 (26.3)210 (24.8)70 (26.6)56 (33.3)
    • ↵a Mean and interquartile range for total = 58.6 y (54.4–63.3 y), normal = 58.7 y (55.0–62.7 y), false positive = 57.1 y (53.2–62.4 y), and breast cancer = 61.0 y (55.8–66.0 y).

    • ↵b Includes 5 students.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Adjusted Analyses of Psychosocial Consequences of Breast Cancer Screening: Estimated Mean Differences Between Each Pair of 3 Diagnosis Groups.

    Follow-up Time Follow-up Time
    0 Months 1 Month 6 Months 18 Months 36 Months
    Scale (Range)DifferenceaMean Δ (95% CI)P ValueMean Δ (95% CI)P ValueMean Δ (95% CI)P ValueMean Δ (95% CI)P ValueMean Δ (95% CI)P Value
    1. Sense of dejection (0–18)Normal →→ breast cancer6.34 (5.52 to 7.17)<.0014.09 (2.88 to 5.30)<.0012.54 (1.86 to 3.22)<.0012.18 (1.47 to 2.88)<.0015.91 (5.08 to 6.75)<.001
    Normal → false p ositive5.91 (5.27 to 6.55)<.0010.83 (0.23 to 1.43).0070.88 (0.39 to 1.36)<.0010.69 (0.16 to 1.21).0112.45 (1.89 to 3.02)<.001
    False positive → breast cancer0.43 (−0.58 to 1.44).4013.26 (2.05 to 4.47)<.0011.66 (0.86 to 2.47)<.0011.49 (0.63 to 2.35).0013.46 (2.49 to 4.43)<.001
      No. responding1, 2709429931,0421,034
    2. Anxiety (0–18)Normal → breast cancer6.17 (5.35 to 7.00)<.0013.68 (2.59 to 4.77)<.0012.38 (1.67 to 3.09)<.0012.19 (1.51 to 2.88)<.0015.35 (4.57 to 6.13)<.001
    Normal → false positive5.83 (5.17 to 6.49)<.0011.08 (0.50 to 1.66)<.0010.95 (0.47 to 1.43)<.0010.87 (0.17 to 1.56).0142.39 (1.84 to 2.94)<.001
    False positive → breast cancer0.34 (−0.68 to 1.37).5102.60 (1.47 to 3.72)<.0011.43 (0.60 to 2.26).0011.33 (0.37 to 2.28).0072.96 (2.03 to 3.89)<.001
      No. responding1, 2449309871,0321,029
    3. Negative impact on behavior (0–21)Normal → breast cancer3.99 (3.26 to 4.73)<.0013.76 (2.73 to 4.79)<.0012.31 (1.59 to 3.03)<.0011.79 (1.13 to 2.46)<.0014.87 (4.10 to 5.63)<.001
    Normal → false positive3.70 (3.12 to 4.28)<.0010.89 (0.30 to 1.49).0030.85 (0.35 to 1.36).0010.60 (−0.01 to 1.20).0541.75 (1.24 to 2.25)<.001
    False positive → breast cancer0.29 (−0.61 to 1.20).5272.87 (1.73 to 4.01)<.0011.46 (0.58 to 2.34).0011.20 (0.31 to 2.08).0083.12 (2.24 to 4.00)<.001
      No. responding1,2359349851,0381,025
    4. Negative impact on sleep (0–12)Normal → breast cancer2.89 (2.26 to 3.52)<.0012.77 (1.86 to 3.69)<.0011.99 (1.34 to 2.65)<.0011.53 (0.99 to 2.06)<.0013.20 (2.53 to 3.87)<.001
    Normal → false positive2.81 (2.33 to 3.30)<.0010.65 (0.14 to 1.16).0130.71 (0.25 to 1.17).0030.71 (0.17 to 1.25).0101.31 (0.87 to 1.75)<.001
    False positive → breast cancer0.08 (−0.69 to 0.85).8452.12 (1.17 to 3.08)<.0011.29 (0.50 to 2.08).0010.82 (0.08 to 1.55).0291.89 (1.12 to 2.66)<.001
      No. responding1,2579419841,0431,043
    5. Breast examination (0–6)Normal → breast cancer1.73 (1.40 to 2.06)<.0011.13 (0.69 to 1.57)<.0010.99 (0.69 to 1.30)<.0010.67 (0.38 to 0.95)<.0011.37 (1.08 to 1.66)<.001
    Normal → false positive1.64 (1.40 to 1.88)<.0010.46 (0.22 to 0.69)<.0010.38 (0.17 to 0.60).0010.38 (0.14 to 0.62).0020.69 (0.47 to 0.90)<.001
    False positive → breast cancer0.10 (−0.29 to 0.48).6290.67 (0.21 to 1.14).0050.61 (0.27 to 0.95)<.0010.28 (−0.06 to 0.63).1060.68 (0.35 to 1.02)<.001
      No. responding1,28 09429981,0531,04 4
    6. Negative impact on sexuality (0–6)Normal → breast cancer1.04 (0.58 to 1.50)<.0011.55 (1.00 to 2.11)<.0011.26 (0.80 to 1.72)<.0011.01 (0.63 to 1.39)<.0011.97 (1.54 to 2.40)<.001
    Normal → false positive0.76 (0.45 to 1.07)<.0010.26 (−0.09 to 0.61).1510.13 (−0.09 to 0.35).2340.31 (−0.04 to 0.66).0860.50 (0.26 to 0.74)<.001
    False positive → breast cancer0.29 (−0.27 to 0.84).3161.29 (0.66 to 1.92)<.0011.13 (0.65 to 1.61)<.0010.70 (0.20 to 1.21).0061.47 (0.99 to 1.95)<.001
      No. responding992842889939900
    Single item: felt less attractive (0–3)Normal → breast cancer0.20 (0.10 to 0.30)<.0010.48 (0.32 to 0.65)<.0010.45 (0.26 to 0.65)<.0010.29 (0.17 to 0.41)<.0010.36 (0.24 to 0.48)<.001
    Normal → false positive0.17 (0.10 to 0.25)<.0010.08 (−0.00 to 0.16).0600.13 (0.03 to 0.22).0080.07 (0.01 to 0.14).0230.09 (0.03 to 0.15).003
    False positive → breast cancer0.03 (−0.10 to 0.15).6680.40 (0.22 to 0.58)<.0010.33 (0.11 to 0.54).0030.22 (0.09 to 0.35).0010.27 (0.14 to 0.40)<.001
      No. responding1,2619419931,0501,0 42
    Single item: Keeping my mind off things (0–3)Normal → breast cancer1.14 (0.96 to 1.31)<.0010.84 (0.57 to 1.11)<.0010.44 (0.28 to 0.60)<.0010.51 (0.34 to 0.67)<.0011.07 (0.89 to 1.25)<.001
    Normal → false positive1.10 (0.96 to 1.25)<.0010.21 (0.05 to 0.37).0100.23 (0.11 to 0.35)<.0010.16 (0.04 to 0.27).0070.44 (0.32 to 0.57)<.001
    False positive → breast cancer0.04 (−0.18 to 0.26).7410.63 (0.34 to 0.92)<.0010.21 (0.01 to 0.41).0370.35 (0.16 to 0.55)<.0010.63 (0.41 to 0.84)<.001
      No. responding1,2929469991,0531,048
    7. Worried about breast cancer (0–4)Normal → breast cancerNANANANANA
    Normal → false positiveNA0.61 (0.30 to 0.92)<.0010.23 (0.02 to 0.43).0300.16 (−0.03 to 0.35).0990.69 (0.49 to 0.90)<.001
    False positive → breast cancerNANANANANA
      No. responding0826863912930
    8. Inner calm (0–4)Normal → breast cancerNA0.56 (0.28 to 0.84)<.0010.43 (0.18 to 0.67).0010.39 (0.14 to 0.63).0020.76 (0.55 to 0.98)<.001
    Normal → false positiveNA0.42 (0.13 to 0.72).0050.16 (−0.04 to 0.36).1150.03 (−0.16 to 0.21).7860.65 (0.46 to 0.84)<.001
    False positive → breast cancerNA0.13 (−0.19 to 0.46).4230.26 (−0.01 to 0.54).0630.36 (0.08 to 0.64).0120.11 (−0.14 to 0.37).396
      No. responding09741,0141,0561,085
    9. Social network (0–6)Normal → breast cancerNA0.81 (0.50 to 1.12)<.0010.91 (0.65 to 1.18)<.0010.58 (0.33 to 0.82)<.0011.29 (1.02 to 1.56)<.001
    Normal → false positiveNA0.34 (0.04 to 0.64).0260.27 (0.09 to 0.46).0040.20 (0.04 to 0.40).0160.39 (0.22 to 0.57)<.001
    False positive → breast cancerNA0.47 (0.14 to 0.81).00664 (0.34 to 0.94)<.0010.38 (0.10 to 0.65).0070.90 (0.60 to 1.19)<.001
      No. responding09671,00 41,0551,082
    10. Existential values (0–12)Normal → breast cancerNA2.90 (2.04 to 3.75)<.0012.59 (1.94 to 3.24)<.0012.27 (1.61 to 2.93)<.0013.02 (2.41 to 3.63)<.001
    Normal → false positiveNA1.74 (1.04 to 2.44)<.0011.46 (0.95 to 1.97)<.0010.83 (0.36 to 1.30).0012.51 (2.02 to 3.00)<.001
    False positive → breast cancerNA1.15 (0.23 to 2.07).0151.12 (0.36 to 1.89).0041.43 (0.69 to 2.19)<.0010.51 (−0.20 to 1.23).158
      No. responding09599961,0431,075

    Note: The correlation between repeated measures on the same woman is controlled for by generalized estimating equations (GEE) methods.

    • NA = not applicable.

    • ↵a The mean difference Ä should be interpreted as the mean score in the group after the arrow minus the mean score in the group before the arrow shown in column marked Difference.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • The Article in Brief

    Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography

    John Brodersen , and colleagues

    Background False-positive results are a common, unintended, harmful effect of breast cancer screening mammography. The aim of this study is to measure the long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography.

    What This Study Found Among 1,310 women, 454 of whom had abnormal findings on screening mammography, those who had a false-positive result reported greater negative psychosocial consequences compared with women with normal test findings, even 3 years after being declared free of suspected cancer. Specifically, 6 months after the final diagnosis, women with false-positive findings reported changes in existential values and inner calmness as great as those reported by women with a true diagnosis of breast cancer. Three years after being declared free of cancer, women with false-positive results reported greater negative psychosocial consequences compared with women who had normal findings in all 12 psychosocial outcomes. The pattern of the 12 psychosocial outcomes was consistent at the time of screening and at 1, 6, and 18 months after screening and final diagnosis: women with breast cancer experienced greater negative psychosocial consequences than women with false-positive findings, and these women experienced greater negative psychosocial consequences than women with normal findings.

    Implications

    • That women with false-positives reported changes just as great in existential values and inner calmness as women with breast cancer in the first half-year after final diagnosis indicates the significant psychological harm caused by false-positive diagnoses.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 11 (2)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 11 (2)
Vol. 11, Issue 2
March/April 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography
John Brodersen, Volkert Dirk Siersma
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2013, 11 (2) 106-115; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1466

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography
John Brodersen, Volkert Dirk Siersma
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2013, 11 (2) 106-115; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1466
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Downstream healthcare use following breast cancer screening: a register-based cohort study
  • Screening for breast cancer with mammography
  • Breast density notification
  • Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography: a cohort study with follow-up of 12-14 years in Denmark
  • 'Diagnostic downshift: clinical and system consequences of extrapolating secondary care testing tactics to primary care
  • Short and long-term psychosocial consequences of participating in a colorectal cancer screening programme: a matched longitudinal study
  • Psychosocial consequences of invitation to colorectal cancer screening: a matched cohort study
  • Targeting lung cancer screening to individuals at greatest risk: the role of genetic factors
  • Toward robust mammography-based models for breast cancer risk
  • Physician Perspectives on Mammography Screening for Average-Risk Women: "Like a Double-Edged Sword"
  • Psychosocial consequences of false positives in the Danish Lung Cancer CT Screening Trial: a nested matched cohort study
  • Influence of Mortality on Estimating the Risk of Kidney Failure in People with Stage 4 CKD
  • Quality of screening mammography
  • "A Natural Progression": Australian Women's Attitudes About an Individualized Breast Screening Model
  • Screening: when things go wrong
  • Geographic Variation in Postoperative Imaging for Low-Risk Breast Cancer
  • Depistage : quand les choses tournent mal
  • Factors Associated with False Positive Results on Screening Mammography in a Population of Predominantly Hispanic Women
  • More than half of abnormal results from laboratory tests ordered by family physicians could be false-positive
  • Demandes concurrentielles et possibilites en soins primaires
  • Competing demands and opportunities in primary care
  • Impact of a False-Positive Screening Mammogram on Subsequent Screening Behavior and Stage at Breast Cancer Diagnosis
  • Authors reply to Timms and Bird
  • Why cancer screening has never been shown to "save lives"--and what we can do about it
  • Prevalence, Long-term Development, and Predictors of Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Mammography among Women Attending Population-Based Screening
  • Diagnostic Invasiveness and Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Mammography
  • National Expenditure For False-Positive Mammograms And Breast Cancer Overdiagnoses Estimated At $4 Billion A Year
  • People's willingness to accept overdetection in cancer screening: population survey
  • Overdetection in breast cancer screening: development and preliminary evaluation of a decision aid
  • How Well Does Supplemental Screening Magnetic Resonance Imaging Work in High-Risk Women?
  • The effect of information about overdetection of breast cancer on women's decision-making about mammography screening: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
  • Some more evidence of long-term psychosocial harms from receiving false-positive screening mammography results
  • Were Our Estimates of Overdiagnosis With Mammography Screening * in the United States "Based on Faulty Science"?
  • A false-positive on screening mammography has a negative psychosocial impact up to 3 years after receiving the all clear
  • In This Issue: Finding the Sweet Spot in Health Care
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Neighborhood Determinants of Primary Care Access in Virginia
  • Proactive Deprescribing Among Older Adults With Polypharmacy: Barriers and Enablers
  • Artificial Intelligence Tools for Preconception Cardiomyopathy Screening Among Women of Reproductive Age
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Domains of illness & health:
    • Mental health
    • Prevention
  • Person groups:
    • Women's health
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods

Keywords

  • mass screening
  • breast cancer
  • false-positive reactions/adverse effects

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine