Breast cancer screening in Europe and the role of general practitioners: A 32-country comparative survey

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is the commonest cancer in women, and screening can allow earlier-stage diagnosis. While there are European recommendations on the age-range and frequency of breast cancer screening, participation in these programmes varies substantially, and this could be due to differences in how they are organised and implemented. The role that primary healthcare professionals play in the process is unclear.We aimed to describe the breast cancer screening programmes in European countries and investigate how primary healthcare professionals are involved in this screening process. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey in 32 countries. Key informants with relevant expertise answered online questions about the characteristics of their screening programmes and general practitioners' (GPs') roles in this. Responses were refined through an iterative consensus process. Data were examined to identify patterns in GP engagement. RESULTS: We found important differences between European breast cancer screening systems. While most had population-based screening, four countries relied on opportunistic screening. In 15 countries GPs had little or no involvement in the process of breast cancer screening, and in 13 countries GPs had some involvement, including identifying eligible patients, issuing referrals, and following-up results. Screening uptake rates tended to be higher in countries with well-established population-based screening programmes which give little or no GP involvement. Few countries linked GP engagement to incentives or performance measures. CONCLUSION: Countries with lower screening uptake should consider either enhancing GP involvement or transitioning to a structured, population-based screening system. Further research should explore how best to integrate primary care within national screening strategies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of General Practice
Published
2026-06-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2026.2689646
Primary Topic
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Breast cancer screening in Europe and the role of general practitioners: A 32-country comparative survey

Dimitra Iosifina Papageorgiou, Norbert Král, Krzysztof Buczkowski, Lucas Küppers et al.
European Journal of General Practice
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
article

Breast cancer screening in Europe and the role of general practitioners: A 32-country comparative survey

Dimitra Iosifina Papageorgiou, Norbert Král, Krzysztof Buczkowski, Lucas Küppers, Roland Kraxner, Michael Harris, Jako Burgers, Aida Puia, Mercè Marzo‐Castillejo, Sherihane Bensemmane, Mette Brekke, Rūta Radzevičienė, Zlata Ožvačić Adžić, Gergana Apostolova, Delphine Le Goff, Cecilia Högberg, Ilze Skuja, Didem Kafadar, Marija Zafirovska, Peter Vedsted, Εmmanouil Smyrnakis, Patrick Redmond, Tuomas Koskela, Nataliia Ponzel, Ricardo Zaidan, Robert Hoffman, Nicola Buono, Marika Sulashvili, Anina Pless, Jelena Danilenko, Xenia Wostmann, Marij Petek Šter, Kristi Särgava
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is the commonest cancer in women, and screening can allow earlier-stage diagnosis. While there are European recommendations on the age-range and frequency of breast cancer screening, participation in these programmes varies substantially, and this could be due to differences in how they are organised and implemented. The role that primary healthcare professionals play in the process is unclear.We aimed to describe the breast cancer screening programmes in European countries and investigate how primary healthcare professionals are involved in this screening process. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey in 32 countries. Key informants with relevant expertise answered online questions about the characteristics of their screening programmes and general practitioners' (GPs') roles in this. Responses were refined through an iterative consensus process. Data were examined to identify patterns in GP engagement. RESULTS: We found important differences between European breast cancer screening systems. While most had population-based screening, four countries relied on opportunistic screening. In 15 countries GPs had little or no involvement in the process of breast cancer screening, and in 13 countries GPs had some involvement, including identifying eligible patients, issuing referrals, and following-up results. Screening uptake rates tended to be higher in countries with well-established population-based screening programmes which give little or no GP involvement. Few countries linked GP engagement to incentives or performance measures. CONCLUSION: Countries with lower screening uptake should consider either enhancing GP involvement or transitioning to a structured, population-based screening system. Further research should explore how best to integrate primary care within national screening strategies.

European Journal of General PracticeVol. 32(1)
University of Bern (CH), Mansfield University (US), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (IE), University of Ljubljana (SI), Kubota (Japan) (JP), University of Georgia (US), Tampere University (FI), University of Zagreb (HR), University of Oslo (NO), Medical University of Graz (AT), Aarhus University (DK), Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy (RO), Charles University (CZ), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR), University Hospital Bonn (DE), Medical University Plovdiv (BG), Nicolaus Copernicus University (PL), Maastricht University (NL), Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa (TR), The Family Centre (NZ), Primary HealthCare (MT), Riga Stradiņš University (LV), Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol (ES), Adam International Hospital (EG), Primary Health Care (QA), Sciensano (Belgium) (BE), South East European Research Centre (GR), University of Bath (GB), Comenius University Bratislava (SK), Medical University of Vienna (AT), Uzhhorod National University (UA), Umeå University (SE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.