Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22695994›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2012

Mammography: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information.

Francesco Sardanelli, Thomas H Helbich, European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI)

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

3 authors.

Francesco SardanelliDipartimento di Scienze Medico-Chirurgiche, Università degli Studi di Milano, Unità di Radiologia, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Piazza Edmondo Malan 2, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy, francesco.sardanelli@unimi.it.
Thomas H Helbich
European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper summarises the basic information to be offered to women who undergo mammography. After a delineation of the general aim of early diagnosis of breast cancer, the main difference between screening mammography and diagnostic mammography is explained. The best time for scheduling mammography in fertile women is defined. The need to bring images and reports from the previous mammogram (and from other recent breast imaging examinations) is highlighted. The technique and procedure of mammography are briefly described with particular attention to discomfort and pain experienced by a fraction of women who undergo the test. Information is given on the recall during a screening program and on the request for further work-up after a diagnostic mammography. The logic of the diagnostic mammography report and of classification systems such as BI-RADS and R1-R5 is illustrated, and brief but clear information is given about the diagnostic performance of the test, with particular reference to interval cancers. Moreover, the breast cancer risk due to radiation exposure from mammography is compared to the reduction in mortality obtained with the test, and the concept of overdiagnosis is presented. Finally, five frequently asked questions are answered.

Identifiers

PMID22695994
PMCPMC3292646

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.