ReviewEuropean radiology2007
Digital mammography: what do we and what don't we know?
Review in European radiology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00816530 (A Prospective Multicenter Matched-pair Clinical Study to Evaluate the Sensitivity and Specificity of ABUS and Digital X-Ray Mammography), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Prospective Multicenter Matched-pair Clinical Study to Evaluate the Sensitivity and Specificity of ABUS and Digital X-Ray Mammography (XRM) Together as a Breast Cancer Screening Method Compared to XRM Alone in Women With >50% Parenchymal Density.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital zoom of the full-field digital mammogram versus magnification mammography: a systematic review.European radiology · 2020Pooled it
- The impact of the BreastScreen NSW transition from film to digital mammography, 2002-2016: a linked population health data analysis.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Article
- Screening through Temperature and Thermal Pattern Analysis in DMBA - Induced Breast Cancer in Wistar Rats.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2021Article
- Improved Screening Mammogram Workflow by Maximizing PACS Streamlining Capabilities in an Academic Breast Center.Journal of digital imaging · 2017Article
- Mammographic microcalcifications and breast cancer tumorigenesis: a radiologic-pathologic analysis.BMC cancer · 2015Article
- Impact of the digitalisation of mammography on performance parameters and breast dose in the Flemish Breast Cancer Screening Programme.European radiology · 2014Article
- Update on new technologies in digital mammography.International journal of women's health · 2014Review
- Differences in radiological patterns, tumour characteristics and diagnostic precision between digital mammography and screen-film mammography in four breast cancer screening programmes in Spain.European radiology · 2011Article
- Conspicuity of breast cancer according to histopathological type and breast density when imaged by full-field digital mammography compared with screen-film mammography.European radiology · 2011Article
- Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates.European radiology · 2010Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI.European radiology · 2010Article
- Digital versus screen film mammography: a clinical comparison.Biomedical imaging and intervention journal · 2008Article
- Observer variability in screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading.European radiology · 2008Article
- [Workflow in digital screening mammography].Der Radiologe · 2008Review
- The Future of Breast Cancer Diagnostics.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-quality full-field digital mammography has been available now for several years and is increasingly used for both diagnostic and screening mammography. A number of different detector technologies exist, which all have their specific advantages and disadvantages. Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography has been shown to be at least equivalent to film-screen mammography in a general screening population. Digital mammography is superior to screen-film mammography in younger women with dense breasts due to its ability to selectively optimize contrast in areas of dense parenchyma. This advantage is especially important in women with a genetic predisposition for breast cancer, where intensified early detection programs may have to start from 25 to 30 years of age. Tailored image processing and computer-aided diagnosis hold the potential to further improve the early detection of breast cancer. However, at present no consensus exists among radiologists on which processing is optimal for digital mammograms. Image processing may also vary significantly among vendors with so far limited interoperability. This review aims to summarize the available information regarding the impact of digital mammography on workflow and breast cancer diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.