Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28989543›Full record

ReviewMemo2017

New diagnostic tools for breast cancer.

Pascal A T Baltzer, Panagiotis Kapetas, Maria Adele Marino, Paola Clauser

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Memo, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. [Hsa-miR-148a-3p promotes malignant behavior of breast cancer cells by downregulating DUSP1].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors.

Pascal A T BaltzerDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Panagiotis KapetasDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Maria Adele MarinoDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Paola ClauserDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Imaging plays a major role in the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of breast cancer. Findings that require further assessment will be detected both at screening and curative mammography. Most findings that are further worked up tend to yield benign diagnoses. Consequently, there is an ongoing search for new tools to reduce recalls and unnecessary biopsies while maintaining or improving cancer detection rates. The clinically most promising methods in this respect are described and discussed in this review.

Indexed as

Breast cancerContrast-enhanced mammographyElastographyMRITomosynthesis

Identifiers

PMID28989543
PMCPMC5605595

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.