Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26599926›Full record

ArticleRadiology2015

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: State of the Art.

Srinivasan Vedantham, Andrew Karellas, Gopal R Vijayaraghavan, Daniel B Kopans

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Limited-Angle Tomography Using a Neural Network as the Objective Function.International journal of biomedical research & practice · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Srinivasan VedanthamFrom the Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Ave North, Worcester, MA 01655 (S.V., A.K., G.R.V.); and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (D.B.K.).
Andrew KarellasFrom the Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Ave North, Worcester, MA 01655 (S.V., A.K., G.R.V.); and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (D.B.K.).
Gopal R VijayaraghavanFrom the Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Ave North, Worcester, MA 01655 (S.V., A.K., G.R.V.); and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (D.B.K.).
Daniel B KopansFrom the Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Ave North, Worcester, MA 01655 (S.V., A.K., G.R.V.); and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (D.B.K.).

Funding

Optical Imaging Fused with Tomosynthesis for Improved Breast CancerR01CA139449 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI PAULSEN, KEITH D. · 2009 to 2013
$2.9M
Quantitative breast cancer risk index from routine 3-D imagingR21CA176470 · NCI · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI VEDANTHAM, SRINIVASAN · 2013 to 2014
$394k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA139449NCI NIH HHS R21 CA176470
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This topical review on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is provided with the intent of describing the state of the art in terms of technology, results from recent clinical studies, advanced applications, and ongoing efforts to develop multimodality imaging systems that include DBT. Particular emphasis is placed on clinical studies. The observations of increase in cancer detection rates, particularly for invasive cancers, and the reduction in false-positive rates with DBT in prospective trials indicate its benefit for breast cancer screening. Retrospective multireader multicase studies show either noninferiority or superiority of DBT compared with mammography. Methods to curtail radiation dose are of importance. (©) RSNA, 2015.

Indexed as

AdultBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalMammographyMiddle AgedRadiation DosageRadiographic Image EnhancementRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID26599926
PMCPMC4666121

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.