ArticleEuropean radiology2016
Breast cancer detection rates using four different types of mammography detectors.
Article in European radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- A National Audit of Mammography Systems Settings That May Affect the Output of Artificial Intelligence Software.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development of an algorithm to convert mammographic images to appear as if acquired with different technique factors.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2022Article
- Validation of a mammographic image quality modification algorithm using 3D-printed breast phantoms.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2021Article
- OPTIMAM Mammography Image Database: A Large-Scale Resource of Mammography Images and Clinical Data.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2021Article
- Characterization of radiographers' mammography practice in five European countries: a pilot study.Insights into imaging · 2019Article
- Mammography cancer detection: comparison of single 8MP and pair of 5MP reporting monitors.The British journal of radiology · 2018Article
- The relationship between cancer detection in mammography and image quality measurements.Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the performance of different types of detectors in breast cancer detection.
methodsA mammography image set containing subtle malignant non-calcification lesions, biopsy-proven benign lesions, simulated malignant calcification clusters and normals was acquired using amorphous-selenium (a-Se) detectors. The images were adapted to simulate four types of detectors at the same radiation dose: digital radiography (DR) detectors with a-Se and caesium iodide (CsI) convertors, and computed radiography (CR) detectors with a powder phosphor (PIP) and a needle phosphor (NIP). Seven observers marked suspicious and benign lesions. Analysis was undertaken using jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristics weighted figure of merit (FoM). The cancer detection fraction (CDF) was estimated for a representative image set from screening.
resultsNo significant differences in the FoMs between the DR detectors were measured. For calcification clusters and non-calcification lesions, both CR detectors' FoMs were significantly lower than for DR detectors. The calcification cluster's FoM for CR NIP was significantly better than for CR PIP. The estimated CDFs with CR PIP and CR NIP detectors were up to 15% and 22% lower, respectively, than for DR detectors.
conclusionCancer detection is affected by detector type, and the use of CR in mammography should be reconsidered. KEY POINTS: The type of mammography detector can affect the cancer detection rates. CR detectors performed worse than DR detectors in mammography. Needle phosphor CR performed better than powder phosphor CR. Calcification clusters detection is more sensitive to detector type than other cancers.
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.