Observational studyEuropean radiology2018
Diagnostic value of the stand-alone synthetic image in digital breast tomosynthesis examinations.
Observational study in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer detection: a diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2020Pooled it
- Investigating the effect of adding comparisons with prior mammograms to standalone digital breast tomosynthesis screening.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Workload reduction of digital breast tomosynthesis screening using artificial intelligence and synthetic mammography: a simulation study.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- An Exploration of Discrepant Recalls Between AI and Human Readers of Malignant Lesions in Digital Mammography Screening.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparing synthetic mammograms based on wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis with digital mammograms.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Prediction of axillary lymph node metastasis in early breast cancer patients with ultrasonic videos based deep learning.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Comparison of two-dimensional synthesized mammograms versus original digital mammograms: a quantitative assessment.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2021Article
- Comparison of two-view versus single-view digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D-mammography in breast cancer surveillance imaging.PloS one · 2021Article
- Stand-Alone Artificial Intelligence for Breast Cancer Detection in Mammography: Comparison With 101 Radiologists.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2019Article
- Can we reduce the workload of mammographic screening by automatic identification of normal exams with artificial intelligence? A feasibility study.European radiology · 2019Article
- The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis.Cancer management and research · 2019Review
- Comparison of synthetic and digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis or alone for the detection and classification of microcalcifications.European radiology · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo demonstrate the non-inferiority of synthetic image (SI) mammography versus full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in breast tomosynthesis (DBT) examinations.
methodsAn observational, retrospective, single-centre, multireader blinded study was performed, using 2384 images to directly compare SI and FFDM based on Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) categorisation and visibility of radiological findings. Readers had no access to digital breast tomosynthesis slices. Multiple reader, multiple case (MRMC) receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology was used to compare the diagnostic performance of SI and FFDM images. The kappa statistic was used to estimate the inter-reader and intra-reader reliability.
resultsThe area under the ROC curves (AUC) reveals the non-inferiority of SI versus FFDM based on BIRADS categorisation [difference between AUC (ΔAUC), -0.014] and lesion visibility (ΔAUC, -0.001) but the differences were not statistically significant (p=0.282 for BIRADS; p=0.961 for lesion visibility). On average, 77.4% of malignant lesions were detected with SI versus 76.5% with FFDM. Sensitivity and specificity of SI are superior to FFDM for malignant lesions scored as BIRADS 5 and breasts categorised as BIRADS 1.
conclusionsSI is not inferior to FFDM when DBT slices are not available during image reading. SI can replace FFDM, reducing the dose by 45%. KEY POINTS: • Stand-alone SI demonstrated performance not inferior for lesion visibility as compared to FFDM. • Stand-alone SI demonstrated performance not inferior for lesion BIRADS categorisation as compared to FFDM. • Synthetic images provide important dose savings in breast tomosynthesis examinations.
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.