ArticleNorthern clinics of Istanbul2014
Comparison of clinicopathological findings among patients whose mammography results were classified as category 4 subgroups of the BI-RADS.
Article in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of patient age and breast parenchymal density on Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BIRADS-4) Subcategorization.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2024Article
- Application of a second opinion ultrasound in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 4A cases: can immediate biopsy be avoided?The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- The Positive Predictive Values of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 Lesions and its Mammographic Morphological Features.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOur aim is to compare mammographic, demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of patients whose mammographies were classified as subgroups of BI-RADS 4 category (Breast Imaging - Reporting and Data System).
methodsIn total, 103 patients with mammography (Senographe 600t Senix HF; General Electric, Moulineaux, France) results classified as BI-RADS 4 were included in the study. Demographic data (age, menopause, and family history) were recorded. All data were compared among BI-RADS 4 subgroups.
resultsIn all, 68.9% (71/103), 7.8% (8/103) and 23.3% (24/103) the patients were in groups BI-RADS 4A, 4B and 4C, respectively. The incidence of malignancy was higher in Groups 4B and 4C than in Group 4A (p<0.05), but similar in Groups 4B and 4C (p>0.05). Mean age was lower in Group 4B than in Groups 4A and 4C (p<0.05). A positive family history was more common in Group 4A than in Group 4B (p=0.025). The frequency of menopausal patients was greater in Groups 4A and 4C than in Group 4B (p=0.021, and 0.003, respectively).
methodsThe rate of malignancy was higher in Groups 4B, and 4C than in Group 4A. A positive family history was more common in Group 4A than in Group 4C. Groups 4A, and 4C patients tended to be older and were more likely to be menopausal than Group 4B patients.
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.