ArticleEuropean radiology2019
Comparison of synthetic and digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis or alone for the detection and classification of microcalcifications.
Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of tomosynthesis plus synthetic mammography versus full-field digital mammography with or without tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical diagnostic accuracy and non-inferiority of digital breast tomosynthesis by synthetic 2D mammography compared with full-field digital mammography for the diagnosis of breast cancer: a single-center retrospective study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Optimized signal of calcifications in wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis: a virtual imaging trial.European radiology · 2024Article
- Improving mammography interpretation for both novice and experienced readers: a comparative study of two commercial artificial intelligence software.European radiology · 2024Article
- Deep learning denoising of digital breast tomosynthesis: Observer performance study of the effect on detection of microcalcifications in breast phantom images.Medical physics · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a prediction model for the diagnosis of breast cancer based on clinical and ultrasonic features.Gland surgery · 2023Article
- Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography, digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis for microcalcifications and margins to microcalcifications in breast specimens.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with the Two-Dimensional Synthesized Mammogram for Suspicious Breast Microcalcifications Compared to Full-Field Digital Mammography in Stereotactic Breast Biopsy.Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2022Article
- One view or two views for wide-angle tomosynthesis with synthetic mammography in the assessment setting?European radiology · 2022Article
- 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
- Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Concepts and Clinical Practice.Radiology · 2019Review
- Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Suspicious Calcifications From Various Populations: A Comparison With Full-field Digital Mammography.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019Article
- The role of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: a manufacturer- and metrics-specific analysis.Cancer management and research · 2019Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the performance of synthetic mammography (SM) and digital mammography (DM) with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) or alone for the evaluation of microcalcifications.
methodsThis retrospective study includes 198 mammography cases, all with DM, SM, and DBT images, from January to October 2013. Three radiologists interpreted images and recorded the presence of microcalcifications and their conspicuity scores and final BI-RADS categories (1, 2, 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, 5). Readers' area under the ROC curves (AUCs) were analyzed for SM plus DBT vs. DM plus DBT and SM alone vs. DM alone using the BI-RADS categories for the overall group and dense breast subgroup.
resultsConspicuity scores of detected microcalcifications were neither significantly different between SM and DM with DBT nor alone (p>0.05). In predicting malignancy of detected microcalcifications, no significant difference was found between readers' AUCs for SM and DM with DBT or alone in the overall group or dense breast subgroup (p>0.05).
conclusionsDiagnostic performances of SM and DM for the evaluation of microcalcifications are not significantly different, whether performed with DBT or alone. KEY POINTS: • In DBT-imaging, SM and DM show comparable performances when evaluating microcalcifications. • For BI-RADS classification of microcalcifications, SM and DM show similar AUCs. • DBT with SM may be sufficient for diagnosing microcalcifications, without DM.
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.