Breast Cancer Screening: Updated Recommendations of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Brazilian Breast Disease Society, and Brazilian Federation of Gynecological and Obstetrical Associations

Clinical practice guidelines and consensus for the screening of breast cancer: A systematic appraisal of their quality and reporting

“…A total of 5616 publications for not meeting the selection criteria and 146 duplicated guidances were removed. Finally, 35 CPGs ((ABS) AoBS, 2018; (AGO) AGO, 2019a; (AGO) AGO, 2019b; (HIS) HiS, 2018; (RCR) RCoR, 2019; American Cancer Society, 2019; Asociación Española de Cirugía (AEC), 2017; Breast Expert Advisory Group/Northern Cancer Alliance, 2019; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2019; China Anti‐Cancer Association, 2019; Ditsch et al, 2020; ESMO, 2019; Fisterra, 2019; Huang et al, 2019; Instituto Nacional de Colombia, 2017; Klarenbach et al, 2018; Mainiero et al, 2017; Migowski, Dias, et al, 2018; Migowski, Silva, et al, 2018; Migowski, Stein, et al, 2018; Ministry of Health Malaysia, 2019; Monticciolo et al, 2018; National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China, 2019; NCCN, 2019; Ontario, 2017; Pinder et al, 2018; Public Health England, 2017, 2019; Practice Bulletin Number 179, 2017; Qaseem et al, 2019; SEGO, SEOR, SEAP, SESPM, SEDIM, SEMNIM, 2017; Sociedad Española de Senología y Patología Mamaria, 2019; Uematsu et al, 2018; UHo, 2018; Urban et al, 2017) and 5 CSs ((ABSI) AoBSoI, 2017; (ASBS) ASoBS, 2017; Cardoso et al, 2018; The American Society of Breast Surgeons, 2019; Secretaría de Salud de México, 2019; 40 documents) were included for the final review (Table 1). Four CPGs and two CSs were in Spanish and the rest in English.…”

“…This non‐language‐restriction systematic review gave a broad view of the screening scenario guidance literature with a big large number of CPGs and CSs. Being English and Spanish the most widely spoken languages (Amano et al, 2016), most of the societies (China Anti‐Cancer Association, 2019; Huang et al, 2019; National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China, 2019; Uematsu et al, 2018; Ditsch et al, 2020; (AGO) AGO, 2019a; Migowski, Stein, et al, 2018; Migowski, Silva, et al, 2018; Migowski, Dias, et al, 2018; Urban et al, 2017; (AGO) AGO, 2019c presented guideline versions in English and Spanish. One strength of this review is that the authors were fluent in both.…”

“…This non-language-restriction systematic review gave a broad view of the screening scenario guidance literature with a big large number of CPGs and CSs. Being English and Spanish the most widely spoken languages (Amano et al, 2016) Ditsch et al, 2020; (AGO) AGO, 2019a; Urban et al, 2017; (AGO) AGO, 2019c presented guideline versions in English and Spanish. One strength of this review is that the authors were fluent in both.…”

Evidências de Validade da Champion’s Health Belief Model Scale para o Brasil

“…(24,(31)(32)(33) Os itens da escala original foram explicados com três fatores, corroborando com achados desta pesquisa e outros encontrados na literatura. (12,26,27,35) Porém, em estudo desenvolvido na Turquia, com 209 mulheres de duas instituições educativas voltadas para o público feminino, os resultados indicaram ajuste do modelo fatorial para representação por quatro fatores, demonstrando que a versão turca da escala foi composta dos três fatores da versão original, acrescido de mais um Fator denominado 'Prejudices' que incluiu cinco itens indicadores de atitudes preconceituosas das mulheres em relação à mamografia. (23) Observa-se, portanto, que algumas pesquisas conduzidas em diferentes culturas trazem evidências que confirmam estruturas fatoriais diferentes do modelo proposto pelo instrumento original, (21,22) o que pode ser aceitável, considerando os fatores culturais de cada população.…”

“…Destaca-se que a recomendação para realização da mamografia varia, pela Sociedade Brasileira de Mastologia, entre os 40 e 74 anos. (35) Portanto, aponta-se a especificidade da amostra como limitação do estudo, bem como a natureza específica do contexto (realizada em único centro de saúde), o conjunto de polarização nos extremos das respostas, a ausência de validade concorrente e o baixo valor do alfa de Cronbach, os quais precisam ser consideradas em estudos futuros, para consolidar a validade do instrumento, visando fortalecer o potencial deste.…”