Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29436850›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2018

Mammography cancer detection: comparison of single 8MP and pair of 5MP reporting monitors.

Cecilia J Strudley, Kenneth C Young, Lucy M Warren

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cecilia J Strudley1 National Co-ordinating Centre for the Physics of Mammography, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust , Guildford , UK.
Kenneth C Young1 National Co-ordinating Centre for the Physics of Mammography, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust , Guildford , UK.
Lucy M Warren1 National Co-ordinating Centre for the Physics of Mammography, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust , Guildford , UK.
Royal Surrey County Hospital · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 17321
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objective: To compare breast cancer detection using a single 8MP display with using a standard pair of 5MP monitors.

methods: An observer study was carried out in which mammograms were read using full field views only, and again with the additional use of magnified quadrant views. Seven observers read 300 cases, one view per breast, using each display type. Cases comprised 100 normal cases and 200 cases with cancers of subtle or very subtle appearance: 100 with malignant calcification clusters and 100 with non-calcified lesions. JAFROC software was used to analyse the results.

results: When mammograms were viewed full field only, observers performed better (p = 0.050) in detecting malignant calcification clusters when using the pair of 5MP monitors compared with a single 8MP monitor. This result became non-significant when results were generalised to a population of readers. Performance in detecting calcification clusters was improved by using quadrant view in addition to full field view when using either the pair of 5MP monitors or the 8MP monitor. There was no significant difference in detection of all types of cancer between the pair of 5MP monitors and the 8MP monitor when quadrant zoom was used.

conclusion: Providing quadrant view is used in addition to full field view, there is no significant difference in cancer detection between the 8MP monitor and the pair of 5MP monitors. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: Effect of magnification on the detectability of subtle malignant calcification clusters in breast screening.

Indexed as

Data DisplayBreast NeoplasmsCalcinosisComputer TerminalsFemaleHumansMammographyRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID29436850
PMCPMC6350498
OpenAlexW2787877334

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.