Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25659139›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2015

Ethnic differences in mammographic densities: an Asian cross-sectional study.

Shivaani Mariapun, Jingmei Li, Cheng Har Yip, Nur Aishah Mohd Taib, Soo-Hwang Teo

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. The epidemiologic factors associated with breast density: A review.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Shivaani MariapunCancer Research Initiatives Foundation, Sime Darby Medical Centre, 1 Jalan SS12/1A, Subang Jaya, 47500 Selangor, Malaysia; Breast Cancer Research Unit, University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Jingmei LiHuman Genetics, Genome Institute of Singapore, Singapore 138672, Singapore.
Cheng Har YipSime Darby Medical Centre, 1 Jalan SS12/1A, Subang Jaya, 47500 Selangor, Malaysia.
Nur Aishah Mohd TaibBreast Cancer Research Unit, University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Soo-Hwang TeoCancer Research Initiatives Foundation, Sime Darby Medical Centre, 1 Jalan SS12/1A, Subang Jaya, 47500 Selangor, Malaysia; Breast Cancer Research Unit, University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Subang Jaya Medical Centre · MYCancer Research Malaysia · MYGenome Institute of Singapore · SGUniversity of Malaya · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer and is highly variable, but, to date, few studies have examined density in Asian women, particularly those in low and middle-income Asian countries where genetic and lifestyle determinants may be significantly different.

methodsA total of 1,240 women who attended an opportunistic mammogram screening programme were eligible for analysis. Mammographic density was estimated using a fully-automated thresholding method and differences across ethnic groups were examined using linear regression in 205 randomly selected Chinese women, 138 Malay and 199 Indian women.

resultsPercent density was significantly higher in Chinese women (28.5%; 95% CI 27.0%, 30.0%) compared to Malay (24.2%; 95% CI 22.5%, 26.0%) and Indian (24.3%; 95% CI 22.8%, 25.7%) women (p<0.001), after adjustment for age, BMI, menopausal status, parity and age at first full term pregnancy. Correspondingly, adjusted nondense area was significantly lower in Chinese (72.2cm2; 95% CI 67.9cm2, 76.5cm2) women compared to Malay (92.1cm2; 95% CI 86.9cm2, 97.2cm2) and Indian (97.7cm2; 95% CI 93.4cm2, 101.9cm2) women (p<0.001), but dense area did not differ across the three ethnic groups.

conclusionsOur study shows that higher percent density and lower nondense area reflect the higher incidence of breast cancer in Chinese compared to Malay and Indian women in Malaysia. Known lifestyle determinants of mammographic density do not fully account for the ethnic variations observed in mammographic density in this Asian cohort.

Indexed as

MammographyAdultAgedAge FactorsAsian PeopleAttitude to HealthCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalaysiaMiddle AgedPregnancySingapore

Identifiers

PMID25659139
PMCPMC4320072
OpenAlexW2060543783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.