Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30915385›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2019

Three-dimensionally-printed anthropomorphic physical phantom for mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis with custom materials, lesions, and uniform quality control region.

Andrea H Rossman, Matthew Catenacci, Christine Zhao, Dhiraj Sikaria, John E Knudsen, Danielle Dawes, Michael E Gehm, Ehsan Samei, Benjamin J Wiley, Joseph Y Lo

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea H RossmanDuke University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Matthew CatenacciDuke University, Department of Chemistry, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Christine ZhaoDuke University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Dhiraj SikariaDuke University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
John E KnudsenDuke University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Danielle DawesDuke University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5452-5721
Michael E GehmDuke University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4163-749X
Ehsan SameiDuke University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7451-3309
Benjamin J WileyDuke University, Department of Chemistry, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
Joseph Y LoDuke University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Durham, North Carolina, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9540-5072
Duke University · USAdvanced Imaging Research (United States) · US

Funding

Women's Cancer Research ProgramP30CA014236 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI DONNA NIEDZWIECKI · 1985 to 2026
$174.8M
3D Printing of Anatomically Realistic Phantoms for Optimization of Imaging AlgorithmsR21EB025549 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LO, JOSEPH Y, WILEY, BENJAMIN J. · 2018 to 2019
$420k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014236NIBIB NIH HHS R21 EB025549
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anthropomorphic breast phantoms mimic patient anatomy in order to evaluate clinical mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis system performance. Our goal is to create a modular phantom with an anthropomorphic region to allow for improved lesion and calcification detection as well as a uniform region to evaluate standard quality control (QC) metrics. Previous versions of this phantom used commercial photopolymer inkjet three-dimensional printers to recreate breast anatomy using four surfaces that were fabricated with commercial materials spanning only a limited breast density range of 36% to 64%. We use modified printers to create voxelized, dithered breast phantoms with continuous gradations between glandular and adipose tissues. Moreover, the new phantom replicates the low-end density (representing adipose tissue) using third party material, Jf Flexible, and increases the high-end density to the density of glandular tissue and beyond by either doping Jf Flexible with salts and nanoparticles or using a new commercial resin, VeroPureWhite. An insert design is utilized to add masses, calcifications, and iodinated objects into the phantom for increased utility. The uniform chest wall region provides a space for traditional QC objects such as line pair patterns for measuring resolution and scale bars for measuring printer linearity. Incorporating these distinct design modules enables us to create an improved, complete breast phantom to better evaluate clinical mammography systems for lesion and calcification detection and standard QC performance evaluation.

Indexed as

breast cancerdigital breast tomosynthesisimaging phantommammographythree-dimensional printing

Identifiers

PMID30915385
PMCPMC6428804
OpenAlexW2922867439

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.