Does double reading improve breast cancer screening?

Conclusions?    1) My conclusion is that this proves that double reading adds nothing important to screening - particularly if women are getting yearly mammograms. This should be the stake in the heart of the double reading vampire. Given the criticism of mammography - that it doesn't save many, or any lives, this extra tenth of a percent of diagnosis is even more questionable. Nah, not just questionable, I'd say it is so low that there are probably, within error bars, no lives saved.    Do they say this. No: "Detecting these extra cancers may be associated with detecting important pathologic findings earlier, but it may also be associated with increased overdiagnosis from screening," (there's the "o" word again. Do authors have to put it into everything written to get it accepted?). Why can't they just state the obvious - it is worthless.   2) If you have a callback above 7% (or even 5%) you aren’t really helping anyone.      and they do make the requisite statement: "Further analysis of follow-up data on outcomes is [needed]."  (sigh)   and then "Policymakers should consider the overall harms and benefits when deciding whether to use a second reader,   POLICYMAKERS??!!!???. Well, this is Britain, but  how about having doctors decide these medical things?    
Source: AuntMinnie.com Headlines - Category: Radiology Source Type: news