ArticleMedical physics2019
Technical challenges in generalizing calibration techniques for breast density measurements.
Article in Medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging of the Breast.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Calibrated Breast Density Measurements.Academic radiology · 2019Article
- Generalized breast density metrics.Physics in medicine and biology · 2018Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe are developing a calibration methodology for full-field digital mammography (FFDM). Calibration compensates for image acquisition technique influences on the pixel representation, ideally producing improved inter-image breast density estimates. This approach relies on establishing references with rigid breast tissue-equivalent phantoms (BTEs) and requires an accurate estimate of the compressed breast thickness because the system readout is nominal. There is also an attenuation mismatch between adipose breast tissue and the adipose BTE that was noted in our previous work. It is referred to as the "attenuation anomaly" and addressed in this report. The objectives are to evaluate methods to correct for the compressed breast thickness and compensate for the attenuation anomaly.
methodsThickness correction surfaces were established with a deformable phantom (DP) using both image and physical measurements for three direct x-ray conversion FFDM units. The Cumulative Sum serial quality control procedure was established to ensure the thickness correction measurements were stable over time by imaging and calibrating DPs biweekly in lieu of physical measurements. The attenuation anomaly was addressed by evaluating adipose image regions coupled with an optimization technique to adjust the adipose calibration data. We compared calibration consistency across matched left and right cranial caudal (CC) mammographic views (n = 199) with and without corrections using Bland-Altman plots. These plots were complemented by comparing the right and left breast calibrated average (μ
resultsThickness correction surfaces were well approximated as tilted planes and were dependent upon compression force. A correction was developed for the attenuation anomaly. All paddles (large and small paddles for all units) exhibited similar tilt as a function of force. Without correction, m
conclusionThese correction techniques are valid approaches for addressing technical problems with calibration that relies on reference phantoms. The efficacy of the calibration methodology will require validation with clinical endpoints in future studies.
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.