TY - JOUR
T1 - Monitoring and evaluation of breast cancer screening programmes: Selecting candidate performance indicators
AU - Muratov, Sergei
AU - Canelo-Aybar, Carlos
AU - Tarride, Jean-Eric
AU - Alonso-Coello, Pablo
AU - Dimitrova, Nadya
AU - Borisch, Bettina
AU - Castells, Xavier
AU - Duffy, Stephen W.
AU - Fitzpatrick, Patricia
AU - Follmann, Markus
AU - Giordano, Livia
AU - Hofvind, Solveig
AU - Lebeau, Annette
AU - Quinn, Cecily
AU - Torresin, Alberto
AU - Vialli, Claudia
AU - Siesling, Sabine
AU - Ponti, Antonio
AU - Giorgi Rossi, Paolo
AU - Schünemann, Holger
AU - Nyström, Lennarth
AU - Broeders, Mireille
AU - Autelitano, Mariangela
AU - Colzani, Edoardo
AU - Daneš, Jan
AU - Gräwingholt, Axel
AU - Ioannidou-Mouzaka, Lydia
AU - Knox, Susan
AU - Langendam, Miranda
AU - McGarrigle, Helen
AU - Pérez Gómez, Elsa
AU - van Engen, Ruben
AU - Warman, Sue
AU - Young, Kenneth
AU - van Landsveld-Verhoeven, Cary
AU - Lerda, Donata
AU - Saz-Parkinson, Zuleika
AU - Parmelli, Elena
AU - Janusch-Roi, Annett
PY - 2020/8/24
Y1 - 2020/8/24
N2 - Background: In the scope of the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) subgroup was tasked to identify breast cancer screening programme (BCSP) performance indicators, including their acceptable and desirable levels, which are associated with breast cancer (BC) mortality. This paper documents the methodology used for the indicator selection. Methods: The indicators were identified through a multi-stage process. First, a scoping review was conducted to identify existing performance indicators. Second, building on existing frameworks for making well-informed health care choices, a specific conceptual framework was developed to guide the indicator selection. Third, two group exercises including a rating and ranking survey were conducted for indicator selection using pre-determined criteria, such as: relevance, measurability, accurateness, ethics and understandability. The selected indicators were mapped onto a BC screening pathway developed by the M&E subgroup to illustrate the steps of BC screening common to all EU countries. Results: A total of 96 indicators were identified from an initial list of 1325 indicators. After removing redundant and irrelevant indicators and adding those missing, 39 candidate indicators underwent the rating and ranking exercise. Based on the results, the M&E subgroup selected 13 indicators: screening coverage, participation rate, recall rate, breast cancer detection rate, invasive breast cancer detection rate, cancers > 20 mm, cancers ≤10 mm, lymph node status, interval cancer rate, episode sensitivity, time interval between screening and first treatment, benign open surgical biopsy rate, and mastectomy rate. Conclusion: This systematic approach led to the identification of 13 BCSP candidate performance indicators to be further evaluated for their association with BC mortality.
AB - Background: In the scope of the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) subgroup was tasked to identify breast cancer screening programme (BCSP) performance indicators, including their acceptable and desirable levels, which are associated with breast cancer (BC) mortality. This paper documents the methodology used for the indicator selection. Methods: The indicators were identified through a multi-stage process. First, a scoping review was conducted to identify existing performance indicators. Second, building on existing frameworks for making well-informed health care choices, a specific conceptual framework was developed to guide the indicator selection. Third, two group exercises including a rating and ranking survey were conducted for indicator selection using pre-determined criteria, such as: relevance, measurability, accurateness, ethics and understandability. The selected indicators were mapped onto a BC screening pathway developed by the M&E subgroup to illustrate the steps of BC screening common to all EU countries. Results: A total of 96 indicators were identified from an initial list of 1325 indicators. After removing redundant and irrelevant indicators and adding those missing, 39 candidate indicators underwent the rating and ranking exercise. Based on the results, the M&E subgroup selected 13 indicators: screening coverage, participation rate, recall rate, breast cancer detection rate, invasive breast cancer detection rate, cancers > 20 mm, cancers ≤10 mm, lymph node status, interval cancer rate, episode sensitivity, time interval between screening and first treatment, benign open surgical biopsy rate, and mastectomy rate. Conclusion: This systematic approach led to the identification of 13 BCSP candidate performance indicators to be further evaluated for their association with BC mortality.
KW - /methods
KW - Breast neoplasms/diagnostic imaging
KW - Early detection of Cancer
KW - Female
KW - Health care/standards
KW - Mass screening/methods
KW - Programme evaluation
KW - Quality indicators
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090069203&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07289-z
DO - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07289-z
M3 - Article
C2 - 32831048
SN - 1471-2407
VL - 20
JO - BMC Cancer
JF - BMC Cancer
IS - 1
M1 - 795
ER -