{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016355140186915886, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.748031496062992, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Breast density legislation: mandatory disclosure to patients, alternative screening, billing, reimbursement.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is describe the origins and provisions of breast density legislation and to evaluate these mandates with regard to the balance between the potential benefit of supplementary screening and the substantial risk of false-positive findings and the adjunctive tests they necessitate. CONCLUSION. Many states have passed breast density notification legislation, and federal legislation is pending. These mandates present a number of challenges for patients and physicians. There is no consensus regarding the need for supplementary testing solely because a woman has dense breasts. The failure of density legislation to require insurance coverage in many states further complicates implementation of the mandates.