ArticleThe British journal of radiology2018
Breast compression across consecutive examinations among females participating in BreastScreen Norway.
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. 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.
- Assessment of average glandular dose in mammography practice of a teaching hospital in Ghana.The Pan African medical journal · 2024Article
- To what extent are objectively measured mammographic imaging techniques associated with compression outcomes.The British journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Intra- and inter-rater reliability of compressed breast thickness, applied force, and pressure distribution in screening mammography.Acta radiologica open · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective: Breast compression is used in mammography to improve image quality and reduce radiation dose. However, optimal values for compression force are not known, and studies have found large variation in use of compression forces between breast centres and radiographers. We investigated breast compression parameters, including compression force, compression pressure and compressed breast thickness across four consecutive full field digital mammography screening examinations for 25,143 subsequently screened females aged 50-69 years.
methods: Information from females attending four consecutive screening examinations at two breast centres in BreastScreen Norway during January 2007 - March 2016 was available. We compared the changes in compression force, compression pressure and compressed breast thickness from the first to fourth consecutive screening examination, stratified by craniocaudal (CC) and mediolateral oblique (MLO) view.
results: Compression force, compression pressure and compressed breast thickness increased relatively by 18.3, 14.4 and 8.4% respectively, from first to fourth consecutive screening examination in CC view (p<0.001 for all). For MLO view, the values increased relatively by 12.3% for compression force, 9.9% for compression pressure and 6.9% for compressed breast thickness from first to fourth consecutive screening examination (p<0.001 for all).
conclusion: We observed increasing values of breast compression parameters across consecutive screening examinations. Further research should investigate the effect of this variation on image quality and females' experiences of discomfort and pain. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: Breast compression force, compression pressure and compressed breast thickness increased across consecutive screening examinations, which might be of influence for the females' experiences of discomfort and pain during the examination and for image quality.
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.