ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2019
Quantitative Measurements of Breast Density Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Supplemental Screening as an Adjunct to Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening in People With Dense Breasts: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2023Pooled it
- Prophylactic breast irradiation reduces background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on MRI: A secondary analysis.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2020Trial
- Breast density in MRI: an AI-based quantification and relationship to assessment in mammography.NPJ breast cancer · 2025Article
- Cardiovascular computed tomography in cardiovascular disease: An overview of its applications from diagnosis to prediction.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2024Article
- Quantitative background parenchymal enhancement and fibro-glandular density at breast MRI: Association with BRCA status.European radiology · 2023Article
- Fibroglandular tissue segmentation in breast MRI using vision transformers: a multi-institutional evaluation.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Cross-Cultural Review of Sexuality, Relationships, and Body Image after Burns: Analysis of the BSHS-B.European burn journal · 2022Review
- Quantitative Measurement of Breast Density Using Personalized 3D-Printed Breast Model for Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Development of patient-specific 3D-printed breast phantom using silicone and peanut oils for magnetic resonance imaging.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2020Article
- Current Status and Future Perspectives of Artificial Intelligence in Magnetic Resonance Breast Imaging.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast density, a measure of dense fibroglandular tissue relative to non-dense fatty tissue, is confirmed as an independent risk factor of breast cancer. Although there has been an increasing interest in the quantitative assessment of breast density, no research has investigated the optimal technical approach of breast MRI in this aspect. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze the current studies on quantitative assessment of breast density using MRI and to determine the most appropriate technical/operational protocol. Databases (PubMed, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science) were searched systematically for eligible studies. Single arm meta-analysis was conducted to determine quantitative values of MRI in breast density assessments. Combined means with their 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed-effect model. In addition, subgroup meta-analyses were performed with stratification by breast density segmentation/measurement method. Furthermore, alternative groupings based on statistical similarities were identified via a cluster analysis employing study means and standard deviations in a Nearest Neighbor/Single Linkage. A total of 38 studies matched the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Twenty-one of these studies were judged to be eligible for meta-analysis. The results indicated, generally, high levels of heterogeneity between study means within groups and high levels of heterogeneity between study variances within groups. The studies in two main clusters identified by the cluster analysis were also subjected to meta-analyses. The review confirmed high levels of heterogeneity within the breast density studies, considered to be due mainly to the applications of MR breast-imaging protocols and the use of breast density segmentation/measurement methods. Further research should be performed to determine the most appropriate protocol and method for quantifying breast density using MRI.
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.