1. Epidemiology and Global Health

A rapid review of COVID-19’s global impact on breast cancer screening participation rates and volumes from January to December 2020

  1. Reagan Lee
  2. Wei Xu
  3. Marshall Dozier
  4. Ruth McQuillan
  5. Evropi Theodoratou
  6. Jonine Figueroa  Is a corresponding author
  7. On Behalf of UNCOVER and the International Partnership for Resilience in CancerSystems (I-PaRCS), Breast Cancer Working Group 2
  1. Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  2. Centre for Global Health, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  3. Information Services, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  4. Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, United States
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.85680
Share this article
Cite this article
  1. Reagan Lee
  2. Wei Xu
  3. Marshall Dozier
  4. Ruth McQuillan
  5. Evropi Theodoratou
  6. Jonine Figueroa
  7. On Behalf of UNCOVER and the International Partnership for Resilience in CancerSystems (I-PaRCS), Breast Cancer Working Group 2
(2023)
A rapid review of COVID-19’s global impact on breast cancer screening participation rates and volumes from January to December 2020
eLife 12:e85680.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.85680
  2. Download BibTeX
  3. Download .RIS
1 figure, 5 tables and 2 additional files

Figures

Figure 1
Download asset Open asset
PRISMA Flow Diagram for Record Identification, Screening and Inclusion for Analysis (Page et al., 2021).

Tables

Table 1
Descriptive characteristics of included cross-sectional studies (n = 26).
StudyPublication typeStudy designCountryRegion (If not national)Total Female Population of Study AreaSample sizeStudy screening data sourceScreening (National/Regional)Screening age rangeScreening typeScreening time comparisonTypes of Restrictions present over study period†COVID-19 7 day new infection rate in region of focus (per 100000)*
International Travel LimitsInternal Movement ControlsStay at home requirementPublic transport closureBan on gatherings of >10 peoplePublic events banWorkplace closureSchool closureMinimum infection rate in study periodMaximum infection rate in study period
Europe (n=7)
Campbell et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalScotland (UK)2728000Not specifiedNHS ScotlandNational50–70Digital MammographyAug – Dec 2019 vs Aug -Dec 2020YesYesNoNoYesYesYesNo10.14212.67
Jidkova et al., 2022Peer- reviewedCross sectionalBelgiumFlanders3382265Not specifiedFlanders Online Screening DatabaseRegional50–69Digital MammographyJul – Nov 2019 vs Jul – Nov 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes3.58580.63
Knoll et al., 2022PreprintCross sectionalAustriaInnsbruck567300596Database from gynecological oncological center in Austria, TyrolLocal45–69 years invited for screening. Women aged 40–44 years and 70–75 years may opt inDigital MammographyMar – Dec 2019 vs Mar – Dec 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYesno datano data
Eijkelboom et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalNetherlands87010003371Netherlands Cancer RegistryNational50–75Digital MammographyJan – Feb 2020 vs Jul – Aug 2020YesNoNoNoYesNoYesNo0.3267.25
Losurdo et al., 2022Peer- reviewedCross sectionalItalyFriuli Venezia Giulia62441858643“Data-Breast” database of the “Eusoma certified SSD Breast Unit of Trieste and from the Surgical Department of DAI Chirurgia Generale—ASUGI.Regional50–69Digital MammographyOct – Dec 2019 vs Oct – Dec 2020Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡No‡Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡19.2497.6
Toss et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalItalyNorthern Italy, Emilia Romagna229100024994Emilia Romagna National Healthcare SystemRegional45–79Digital Mammography2019 vs 2020Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡Yes‡4.00390.9
NHS England, 2021Government paperCross sectionalEngland (UK)339400002230000NHS EnglandNational50–71Digital Mammography2019 vs 2020YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes0.0092.36
Oceania (n=2)
BreastScreen Australia, 2020Government PaperCross sectionalAustralia12780000Not specifiedBreastScreen AustraliaNational50–74Digital MammographyMay – Sep 2018 vs May – Sep 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes0.1813.31
BreastScreen Aoteroa, 2022Government PaperCross sectionalNew Zealand2497000Not specifiedBreastScreen AotearoaNational45–69Digital MammographyMay – Dec 2018 vs May - Dec 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes01.06
Asia (n=1)
Shen et al., 2022Peer- reviewedCross sectionalChinaTaiwan11981657699911Taiwan National Infectious Disease Statistics systemRegional40–69Digital MammographyJan – Apr 2019 vs Jan – Apr 2020YesNoNoNoNoNoNoYesno datano data
Americas (n=16)
Bessa, 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalBrazil106500000(2019: 20636636; 2020: 21140958)Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS)National50–69Digital Mammography2019 vs 2020YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes0.00149.68
Ribeiro et al., 2022Peer- reviewedCross sectionalBrazil1065000005996798Brazilian National Health Service (SUS) Outpatient Information System (SIA/SUS), SUS Hospital Information System (SIH/SUS), High Complexity Procedure Authorizations database (APAC), Cancer Information System (ISCAN).National50–69Digital MammographyJul – Dec 2019 vs Jul – Dec 2020YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes53.72149.68
Chiarelli et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalCanadaOntario7371000426967Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP)Regional50–74Digital Mammography, MRI (High risk)Jul - Dec 2019 vs Jul - Dec 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes3.99117.01
Walker et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalCanadaOntario7371000605889 (2019) 284242 (2020)Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP)Regional50–74Digital MammographyModelled 2019 data vs Dec 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes75.74117.01
Doubova et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalMexico645700001431216Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS)National40 - unspecifiedDigital MammographyJan 2019 – Mar 2020 vs Apr – Dec 2020YesYesYesNoNoYesYesYes2.6061.12
Chen et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSA167500000Not specifiedHealthCore Integrated Research DatabaseNational50–79 yearsDigital MammographyJul 2019 vs Jul 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes119.03142.00
Amornsiripanitch et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSAMassachusetts353700032387Electronic medical record (Epic, Verona, WI) - Massachusetts. One tertiary care academic center, a community hospital, a specialized cancer center, three outpatient imaging centers, one urban healthcare center, and one mobile mammography vanRegional40 - unspecified yearsDigital MammographyJun – Aug 2019 vs Jun – Aug 2020YesYesNoNoYesYesNoNo17.0653.09
Becker et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSAMichigan50620007250080Women enrolled in Health Managed Organization (HMO) Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) in MichiganRegional40–74Digital MammographyDec 2019 vs Dec 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes147.56328.94
DeGroff et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSA167500000630264Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) Database, which provides cancer screening services to women with low income and inadequate health insuranceNational40–74Digital MammographyJun 2019 vs Jun 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes45.46103.84
Dennis et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSA167500000475083Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey databaseNational40–74Digital Mammography2014–2019 vs 2020YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes0.00460.68
Fedewa et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSA1675000002019:142003 2020:150630Data from 32 CHCs of the American Cancer Society's Community Health Advocates Implementing Nationwide Grants for Empowerment and Equity (CHANGE) grant program to increase BCSRs and follow-up careNational50–74Digital Mammography2019 vs 2020YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes0.00460.68
Lehman et al., 2022PreprintCross sectionalUSA16750000029276Screening database over 5 facilitiesNationalUnspecifiedDigital Mammography2019 vs 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes0.00460.68
London et al., 2022Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSA16750000034000000 (full study including colorectal cancers)TriNetX Research NetworkNationalUnspecifiedDigital MammographyJul – Dec 2019 vs Jul – Dec 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes74.54460.68
Miller et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSAVirginia2757460Not specifiedInstituition Database, University of VirginiaRegionalUnspecified (45 - 70)Digital MammographyJan – Nov 2019 vs Jan - Nov 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYesno datano data
Sprague et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSA16750000046108362 radiology facilities of Breast Cancer Surveillance ConsortiumNational40–79Digital MammographyJan-Jul 2019 vs Jan-Jul 2020YesYesYesNoYesYesYesYes0.00142.00
Nyante et al., 2021Peer- reviewedCross sectionalUSANorth Carolina5099371424127 academic and community breast imaging facilities in North CarolinaRegional40–79Digital MammographyModelled Sep 2019 data vs Sep 2020YesNoNoNoNoYesYesYes80.2791.26

  1. England’s and Scotland’s NHS systems are devolved and, therefore, are separate national entities. However, they hold similar screening criterion where breast screening policy in the NHS (across the UK) is that all women aged 50–70 y + 364 d are invited for breast screening once every 3 y.

  2. *

    These infection rates were region-specific and analogous to the region the study involved. If study period was ≤1 mo, only infection data from the first and last week of the period will be collected. If study period was over the whole year of 2020, the earliest available public health data was used (e.g., study period started from January 2020 but data was only available in March, March data used as first interval of analysis). It should be noted that there is reporting bias here as testing rates may differ between countries. These infection incidence rates were based on national/regional data depending on whether the study population originated from an entire nation or a limited region within a nation. (Dipartimento della Protezione Civile, 2023a; Dipartimento della Protezione Civile, 2023b; Government of Ontario, 2023; Government of the Netherlands, 2023; Cooper et al., 2023; IARC, 2022; Mathieu, 2022; MDHHS, 2023; Medicaid.gov, 2022; NCDHHS, 2023; NHS England, 2021; OECD, 2021a; PAHO, 2020; Sciensano, the Belgian Institute for Health, 2023; SPICe, 2023; State of Michigan, 2020; State of North Carolina, 2020; The Scottish Government, 2022; UK Government, 2023; WHO, 2023; WHO, 2022; WHO, 2022; Worldometer, 2022; WHO, 2021; Yucatan Times, 2021).

  3. †

    Types of restrictions will include restrictions that were withdrawn at any point of the study period. Restrictions present were classified as per non-pharmacological interventions mentioned by the paper Li et al., 2021 ‘The Temporal Association of introducing and lifting non-pharmaceutical interventions with the time-varying reproduction number (R) of SARS-COV-2: A modelling study across 131 countries’, The Lancet Infectious Diseases, if restrictions were introduced/withdrawn during the study period, it will still be indicated as a 'Yes', Data from Oxford COVID-19 policy tracker, devolved state-wide healthcare organization websites in Canada, the USA, and UK was used to assess this.

  4. ‡

    Data was unavailable for regions in this country, national restrictions were assessed instead.

Table 2
Breast cancer screening volumes change among 106,484,908 subjects from eight countries.
Percentage change in volume of breast cancer screening (N = 17)
StudyCountryRegionNational/regional (scope of study population*)Type of breast screening program employed within the study populationSample sizeScreening timeframe comparisonVolume change relative to non-COVID-19 period (%)
Europe (n = 2)
Losurdo et al., 2022ItalyFriuli Venezia GiuliaRegionalPopulation-based screening present in country58,643Oct–Dec 2019 vs. Oct–Dec 202011.90
NHS England, 2021UKEnglandNationalPopulation-based screening present in country3,420,000Monthly average 2019 vs. monthly average 202015.80
Oceania (n = 1)
BreastScreen Australia, 2020AustraliaNANationalPopulation-based screening present in country802,146May–Sep 2018 vs. May–Sep 202012.88
Asia (n = 1)
Shen et al., 2022ChinaTaiwanRegionalPopulation-based screening present in country699,911Jan–Apr 2019 vs. Jan–Apr 202022.07
America (n = 13)
Bessa, 2021BrazilNANationalPopulation-based screening present in country†(2019: 20,636,636; 2020: 21,140,958)2019 vs. 202042.72
Ribeiro et al., 2022BrazilNANationalPopulation-based screening present in country but private sector databases included Brazilian National Health Service (SUS), Outpatient Information System (SIA/SUS), SUS Hospital Information System (SIH/SUS), High Complexity Procedure Authorizations database (APAC), Cancer Information System (ISCAN)5,996,798Jul–Dec 2019 vs. Jul–Dec 202041.49
Doubova et al., 2021MexicoNANationalPopulation-based screening present in country ‡1,431,216Jan 2019–Mar 2020 vs. Apr–Dec 202061.30
Chiarelli et al., 2021CanadaOntarioRegionalPopulation-based screening present in country426,967Jul–Dec 2019 vs. Jul–Dec 202031.30
Walker et al., 2021CanadaOntarioRegionalPopulation-based screening present in country890,131Modeled 2019 data vs. Dec 202022.80
Lehman et al., 2022USANANationalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage29,2762019 vs. 202036.50
Miller et al., 2021USANorth CarolinaRegionalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage8,536,000Jan–Nov 2019 vs. Jan–Nov 20209.80
Amornsiripanitch et al., 2021USAMassachusettsRegionalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage32,387Jun–Aug 2019 vs. Jun–Aug 202010.50
London et al., 2022USANANationalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage34,000,000Dec 2019 vs. Dec 202020.00
DeGroff et al., 2021USANANationalThe National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) that provides cancer screening services to women with low income and inadequate health insurance630,264Jun 2019 vs. Jun 202039.00
Becker et al., 2021USAMichiganRegionalHealth Managed Care Organization (HMO)-based screening (database covers HMO data from Michigan)7,250,080Dec 2019 vs. Dec 202018.10
Sprague et al., 2021USANANationalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage461,083Jul 2019 vs. Jul 202010.30 (–20.40 to 6.60)
Nyante et al., 2021USANorth CarolinaRegionalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage42,412Modeled Sep 2019 data vs. Sep 20209.00

  1. NA indicates not applicable. For studies conducted in the USA, ACS guidelines were used as the data collection comparator starting point where March–June 2020 was considered to be a suspension in screening.

  2. *

    This column highlights the origin of the study population in which whether it was drawn from a specific region within a nation, or if the study population was drawn from the entire country.

  3. †

    The study population from this specific study (Bessa, 2021) was solely drawn from a national population-based screening database in Brazil. It should be noted that Brazil has a lower proportion of population-based breast screening coverage relative to other countries; having a coverage of 24% in the eligible population (Unger-Saldaña et al., 2020).

  4. ‡

    It should be noted that Mexico has a lower proportion of population-based breast screening coverage relative to other countries due to recent introduction; having ~20% coverage of the eligible population (OECD, 2021b; PAHO, 2020).

Table 3
Breast cancer screening participation uptake rates change from nine studies from five countries.
Percentage change in participation uptake rate of breast cancer screening (N = 9)
StudyCountryRegionNational/regional (scope of study population)*Type of breast screening program employed within the study populationSample sizeScreening timeframe comparisonParticipation rate change relative to non-COVID-19 period
Europe (n = 3)
NHS England, 2021UKEnglandNationalPopulation-based screening available in country3,420,0002019 vs. 202011.80%
Campbell et al., 2021UKScotlandNationalPopulation-based screening available in countryNAAug–Dec 2019 vs. Aug–Dec 2020 ‡+10.96% (Aug 2020)
+2–8% (Sep 2020–Mar 2021 vs. Sep 2019– Mar 2020)‡
Jidkova et al., 2022BelgiumFlandersRegionalPopulation-based screening available in countryNAJul–Dec 2019 vs. Jul–Dec 20201.0% (–1.3; –0.7)
Oceania (n = 1)
BreastScreen Aoteroa, 2022New ZealandNANationalPopulation-based screening available in countryNADec 2018/2019 vs. May–Dec 20206.70%
Americas (n = 5)
Bessa, 2021BrazilNANationalPopulation-based screening available in country†(2019: 20,636,636; 2020: 21,140,958)2019 vs. 202043.54%
Dennis et al., 2021USANANationalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage475,083 (age: 50–74) 117,498 (age: 40–49)2014–2019 vs. 20205.30% (50–79)
7.20% (40–49)
Fedewa et al., 2021USANANationalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage434,8402019 vs. 20208.00%
Amornsiripanitch et al., 2021USAMassachusettsRegionalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usage32,387Jun–Aug 2019 vs. Jun–Aug 202014.80%
Chen et al., 2021USANANationalPrivatized system with mix of national and private insurance usageNAJul 2019 vs. Jul 20203.33%

  1. NA indicates not applicable For studies conducted in the USA, ACS guidelines were used as the data collection comparator starting point where Mar-Jun 2020 was considered to be a suspension in screening.

  2. *

    This column highlights the origin of the study population in which whether it was drawn from a specific region within a nation, or if the study population was drawn from the entire country.

  3. †

    The study population from this specific study (Bessa, 2021) was solely drawn from a national population-based screening database in Brazil. It should be noted that Brazil has a lower proportion of population-based breast screening coverage relative to other countries; having a coverage of 24% in the eligible population (Unger-Saldaña et al., 2020).

  4. ‡

    It should be noted that this study presented a range of values (2–8%) comparing the uptake rate from Sep 2020 to Mar 2021 vs. Sep 2019 to Mar 2020. As the timeframe of Jan–Mar 2021 was not within the scope of the study, we used the point estimate of the uptake rate in Aug 2020 vs. Aug 2019 as our last available data point instead.

Table 4
Summary of results of appraisal of all included studies with Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tool for cross-sectional studies.
JBI Critical Appraisal Tool for cross-sectional studies appraisal table
StudyWere the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined?Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail?Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement of the condition?Were confounding factors identified?Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way?Was appropriate statistical analysis used?
Amornsiripanitch et al., 2021YYYYYNUnclearUnclear
Becker et al., 2021YYYNYNNUnclear
Bessa, 2021YUnclearYYNNNUnclear
Campbell et al., 2021YUnclearYYUnclearNYUnclear
Chen et al., 2021YUnclearYYYNYUnclear
Chiarelli et al., 2021YYYYUnclearNYUnclear
DeGroff et al., 2021YYYYYNYUnclear
Dennis et al., 2021YYYYNNYUnclear
Doubova et al., 2021YUnclearYYNNNY
Jidkova et al., 2022YYYYUnclearNYUnclear
Knoll et al., 2022YYYYNNYUnclear
Fedewa et al., 2021YYYYNNYUnclear
BreastScreen Australia, 2020YYYYNNYN
Eijkelboom et al., 2021YYYYYYYUnclear
Lehman et al., 2022NNYYYNYUnclear
London et al., 2022NNYYNNNUnclear
Losurdo et al., 2022YYYYNNYUnclear
Walker et al., 2021YYYYUnclearNYUnclear
Toss et al., 2021YYYYNNYUnclear
Shen et al., 2022YYYYUnclearNYUnclear
Ribeiro et al., 2022YYYYNNYUnclear
Miller et al., 2021YUnclearYYNNYY
Sprague et al., 2021YYYYUnclearYYY
Nyante et al., 2021YYYYYYYY
NHS England, 2021YYYYNNYN
BreastScreen Aoteroa, 2022YYYYNNYN

  1. Green = yes; yellow = unclear; orange = no.

Table 5
Search strategies for rapid review of breast cancer participation and volume during COVID.
Search string for Ovid MEDLINE(R) and In-Process, In-Data-Review & Other Non-Indexed
Citations
Search numberSearch domainSearch string in: [mp = title, book title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, floating subheading word, keyword heading word, organism supplementary concept word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier, synonyms]
#1COVID-19(COVID-19 OR 2019 novel coronavirus disease OR 2019 novel coronavirus infection OR 2019 ncov disease OR 2019 ncov infection OR 2019-ncov disease OR 2019-ncov diseases OR 2019-ncov infection OR 2019-ncov infections OR covid 19 OR covid 19 pandemic OR covid 19 virus disease OR covid 19 virus infection OR covid-19 OR covid-19 pandemic OR covid-19 pandemics OR covid-19 virus disease OR covid-19 virus diseases OR covid-19 virus infection OR covid-19 virus infections OR covid19 OR coronavirus disease 19 OR coronavirus disease 2019 OR coronavirus disease-19 OR disease 2019, coronavirus OR sars cov 2 infection OR sars coronavirus 2 infection OR sars-cov-2 infection OR sars-cov-2 infections OR severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection OR disease, 2019-ncov OR disease, covid-19 virus OR infection, 2019-ncov OR infection, covid-19 virus OR infection, sars-cov-2 OR pandemic, covid-19 OR virus disease, covid-19 OR virus infection, covid-19 OR Coronavirus, 2019 Novel OR ncov OR covid* OR coronavirus* OR SARS* OR severe acute respiratory syndrome OR coronavirus pandemic OR coronavirus disease pandemic)
#2Breast cancer(Breast Neoplasms OR Breast Carcinoma In Situ OR Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast OR Carcinoma, Lobular OR breast cancer OR breast carcinoma* OR breast malignant neoplasm* OR breast malignant tumo?r* OR breast neoplasm* OR breast tumo?r* OR cancer of breast? OR cancer of the breast? OR mammary carcinoma* OR mammary neoplasm* OR malignant neoplasm? of breast OR malignant tumo?r? of breast OR mammary cancer* OR neoplasm?, breast OR tumo?r, breast OR tumo?rs, breast OR cancer?, breast OR cancer?, mammary OR carcinoma?, human mammary OR carcinoma?, breast OR neoplasm?, human mammary OR breast carcinoma in situ OR lobular carcinoma in situ OR lcis, lobular carcinoma in situ OR mammary ductal carcinoma? OR carcinoma, ductal, breast OR carcinoma, infiltrating duct OR carcinoma, invasive ductal, breast OR carcinoma, mammary ductal OR carcinomas, infiltrating duct OR carcinomas, mammary ductal OR invasive ductal carcinoma, breast OR lobular carcinoma? OR carcinoma?, lobular OR breast* OR breast tumo?r OR breast tumo?rs OR breast malignant tumo?rs OR breast malignan* OR mammary malignan* OR malignant tumo?rs of breast OR neoplasm? of breast OR breast neoplasm OR lcis)
#3Mass screening(Mass Screening OR Mass Chest X-ray OR Early Diagnosis OR Early Detection of Cancer OR Mammography OR screening* OR Ultrasonography, Mammary OR Ultrasonography OR mass chest x ray OR mass chest x-ray* OR mass chest xray* OR x-ray, mass chest OR x-rays, mass chest OR xray, mass chest OR xrays, mass chest OR disease early detection OR early detection of disease OR early diagnosis OR diagnosis, early OR cancer early detection OR cancer early diagnosis OR early detection of cancer OR early diagnosis of cancer OR digital breast tomosyntheses OR digital breast tomosynthesis OR x ray breast tomosynthesis OR x-ray breast tomosyntheses OR x-ray breast tomosynthesis OR breast tomosyntheses, digital OR breast tomosyntheses, x-ray OR breast tomosynthesis, digital OR breast tomosynthesis, x-ray OR breast tissue imaging OR mastography OR mass breast xray OR mass breast x-ray OR chest xray OR chest x-ray OR mammogra* OR program* OR ultrasonic* OR echograph* OR echotomograph* OR sonography* OR ultrasonograph* OR ultrasound* OR exam*)
#4Search string1 AND 2 AND 3
#5Final search stringLimit 4 to English language
Search string for WHO COVID-19 Literature Database (updated to March 12, 2022)
Search numberSearch conceptTitle, abstract, subject
#1Breast cancer((Breast Neoplasms) OR (Breast Carcinoma In Situ) OR (Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast) OR (Carcinoma, Lobular) OR (breast cancer*) OR (breast carcinoma*) OR (breast malignant neoplasm*) OR (breast malignant tumo?r*) OR (breast neoplasm*) OR (breast tumo?r*) OR (cancer of breast?) OR (cancer of the breast?) OR (mammary carcinoma*) OR (mammary neoplasm*) OR (malignant neoplasm? of breast) OR (malignant tumo?r? of breast) OR (mammary cancer*) OR (breast carcinoma in situ) OR (lobular carcinoma in situ) OR (mammary ductal carcinoma*) OR (breast ductal carcinoma*) OR (infiltrating duct carcinoma*) OR (invasive ductal carcinoma) OR (mammary ductal carcinoma*) OR (invasive ductal breast carcinoma) OR (lobular carcinoma*) OR (breast tumo?r*) OR (breast malignant tumo?r*) OR (breast malignan*) OR (mammary malignan*) OR (malignant tumo?rs of breast*) OR (neoplasm? of breast) OR (lcis*))
#2Screening((Mass Screening) OR (Mass Chest X-ray) OR (Early Diagnosis) OR (Early Detection of Cancer) OR (Mammography) OR (Ultrasonography, Mammary) OR (Ultrasonography) OR (national screening) OR (screening*) OR (mass chest x ray) OR (mass chest x-ray*) OR (mass chest xray*) OR (mass chest x-ray*) OR (disease early detection) OR (early detection of disease) OR (early diagnosis) OR (diagnosis, early) OR (cancer early detection) OR (cancer early diagnosis) OR (early detection of cancer) OR (early diagnosis of cancer) OR (digital breast tomosyntheses) OR (digital breast tomosynthesis) OR (x ray breast tomosynthesis) OR (x-ray breast tomosyntheses) OR (breast tomosynthesis*) OR (breast tissue imaging) OR (mastography) OR (mass breast xray) OR (mass breast x-ray) OR (chest xray) OR (chest x-ray) OR (mammogra*) OR (program*) OR (ultrasonic*) OR (echograph*) OR (ultrasonographic*) OR (sonography*) OR (echotomograph*) OR (ultrasound*) OR (exam*))
#3Final search string#1 AND #2
English-language filter

Additional files

MDAR checklist
https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85680/elife-85680-mdarchecklist1-v2.pdf
Supplementary file 1

Full descriptive characteristics and data from included cross-sectional studies (n=26).

https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85680/elife-85680-supp1-v2.xlsx

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Reagan Lee
  2. Wei Xu
  3. Marshall Dozier
  4. Ruth McQuillan
  5. Evropi Theodoratou
  6. Jonine Figueroa
  7. On Behalf of UNCOVER and the International Partnership for Resilience in CancerSystems (I-PaRCS), Breast Cancer Working Group 2
(2023)
A rapid review of COVID-19’s global impact on breast cancer screening participation rates and volumes from January to December 2020
eLife 12:e85680.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.85680