Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21918690›Full record

ArticleThe Pan African medical journal2010

How accurate is ultrasound in evaluating palpable breast masses?

Mubuuke Aloysius Gonzaga

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Pan African medical journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mubuuke Aloysius GonzagaRadiology Department, School of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Makerere University · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBreast masses have become common in women. Such masses pose a potential threat to women especially in the era of increased cases of breast cancer worldwide. Breast carcinoma ranks first among the malignant tumors affecting females in many parts of the world with the rate of breast cancer being 1 in 8 in USA. There are currently more than 600 000 cancer deaths annually in Africa. By 2020, 70% of the 15 million new annual cancer cases will be in developing countries. Ultrasound is a relatively inexpensive and readily accessible imaging modality that can be utilized in the evaluation of clinically palpable breast masses. The purpose of this study was to find out the accuracy of ultrasound in the diagnosis of palpable breast masses.

methodsEighty palpable breast masses were evaluated at ultrasound and information about the characteristic features of the masses was recorded. An impression about the diagnosis was made and results were correlated with histology findings.

resultsThe overall sensitivity of ultrasound in detecting breast lumps was 92.5%. The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for detecting breast carcinoma was 57.1% and 62.8% respectively with a positive predictive value of 68.1%, a negative predictive value of 99.5%, a positive likelihood ratio of 39 and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.07. Ultrasound reliably differentiated cystic from solid breast masses.

conclusionUltrasound is significant in differentiating cystic from solid breast masses. Ultrasound is also important in detecting suspicious breast masses and should therefore be used in the evaluation of symptomatic breast masses.

Indexed as

Ultrasonography, MammaryAdultAge DistributionBreast NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialFalse Negative ReactionsFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansPalpationPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adultaccuracypalpable breast massesUgandaUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID21918690
PMCPMC3172638
OpenAlexW2117372618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.