ArticleRadiology2019
Effect of Mammographic Screening Modality on Breast Density Assessment: Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Article in Radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Head-to-head comparisons of breast density assessment models using deep learning on digital and synthetic mammograms.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2026Article
- Agreement Among Breast Cancer Screening Modalities in Breast Density Assessment and Cancer Risk Prediction.International journal of breast cancer · 2026Article
- Assessing mammographic density change within individuals across screening rounds using deep learning-based software.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Pathological and radiological assessment of benign breast lesions with BIRADS IVc/V subtypes. should we repeat the biopsy?BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Relationship between breast tissue involution and breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Comparison of Full-Field Digital Mammography with Synthesized Mammography from Tomosynthesis in a Diagnostic population: Prospective Study.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025Article
- The burden and long-term trends of breast cancer by different menopausal status in China.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Breast Imaging: Current Status and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Breast Density Evaluation According to BI-RADS 5th Edition on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: AI Automated Assessment Versus Human Visual Assessment.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Beyond Breast Density: Risk Measures for Breast Cancer in Multiple Imaging Modalities.Radiology · 2023Review
- Persistent inter-observer variability of breast density assessment using BI-RADS® 5th edition guidelines.Clinical imaging · 2022Article
- Fully Automated Volumetric Breast Density Estimation from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.Radiology · 2021Article
- Fibroglandular tissue distribution in the breast during mammography and tomosynthesis based on breast CT data: A patient-based characterization of the breast parenchyma.Medical physics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density categories assigned by interpreting radiologists often influence decisions surrounding supplemental breast cancer screening and risk assessment. The landscape of mammographic screening continuously evolves, and different mammographic screening modalities may result in different perception of density, reflected in different assignment of BI-RADS density categories. Purpose To investigate the effect of screening mammography modality on BI-RADS breast density assessments. Materials and Methods Data were retrospectively analyzed from 24 736 individual women (42.3% [10 455 of 24 736] white women, 57.7% [14 281 of 24 736] black women; mean age, 56.3 years; age range, 40.0-74.9 years) who underwent from one to seven mammographic screening examinations from September 2010 through February 2017 (60 766 examinations). Three screening modalities were used: digital mammography alone (8935 examinations); digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT; 30 779 examinations); and synthetic mammography with DBT (21 052 examinations). Random-effects logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the likelihood of assignment to high versus low BI-RADS density category according to each modality, adjusted for ethnicity, age, body mass index (BMI), and radiologist. The interactions of modality with ethnicity and BMI on density categorization were also tested with the model. Results Women screened with DBT versus digital mammography alone had lower likelihood regarding categorization of high density breasts (digital mammography and DBT vs digital mammography: odds ratio, 0.69 [95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.80],
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.