SynthesisEuropean radiology2009
Technical aspects of breast MRI--do they affect outcomes?
Synthesis in European radiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative assessment of patients with primary breast cancer: systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2012Pooled it
- Comparison of three arm-positioning techniques for minimizing motion artifacts in breast magnetic resonance imaging: a prospective volunteer study.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Article
- [Diffusion-weighted breast imaging. Clinical implementation procedure].Der Radiologe · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a systematic review of breast MRI for assessing ipsilateral breast cancer to detect additional lesions, technical details were extracted from publications to assess their effect on diagnostic performance. Where technical parameters were complete, we examined their effect on summary ROC models, and the TP:FP ratio and PPV, using random-effects logistic regression. A total of 2,801 breasts in 19 publications underwent statistical analysis for year of study, slice thickness, and repetitions after contrast-medium injection. None were associated with TP/FP ratio. Summary ROC analysis provided weak evidence (P = 0.09) of an association between diagnostic performance and time period, however no trend over time. Tesla strength was reported in 2,801 cases. Other key information was omitted including whether both breasts were examined for 1683 (60%), position of the patient in 1,375 (49%), and imaging planes used in 688 (25%). Contrast agent and dose were reported for 2,646 (95%) breasts. Reporting technique was inconsistently reported. Single radiology reports were found in 1,637 (58%) cases, double in 347 (12.4%), and in 960 (34%) knowledge of mammography or ultrasound findings was not stated. Slice thickness, number of sequences after contrast medium, and year of study did not show significant performance differences. Other technical information was deficient. There is an urgent need to improve the quality of reporting of breast MRI studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19247664What 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.