ArticlePolish journal of radiology2019
Evaluation of the positive predictive value (PPV3) of ACR BI-RADS category 4 and 5 based on the outcomes of Invasive Diagnostic Office in an outpatient clinic.
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Histopathological Analysis of Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy in Relation to Microcalcification Findings on Mammography: A Pictorial Review.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- A Retrospective Chart Analysis Comparing Breast Cancer Detection Rates Between Annual Versus Biennial Mammograms.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2024Article
- Article
- A Deep Learning Decision Support Tool to Improve Risk Stratification and Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies in BI-RADS 4 Mammograms.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2023Article
- Invasive lobular carcinoma mammographic findings: correlation with age, breast composition, and tumour size.Polish journal of radiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe American College of Radiology (ACR) BI-RADS classification is the applicable for breast lesion assessment. BI-RADS categories 4 and 5 need to be followed by biopsy. The aim of our study was to evaluate the tissue biopsy-proven positive predictive value (PPV3) for BI-RADS 4 (and its subcategories) and for BI-RADS 5, and BI-RADS distribution, in comparison to ACR assumptions and literature. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe retrospectively analysed biopsies performed in our outpatient clinic in 2017. Our target group of patients consisted of 797 patients at the average age of 52 years.
resultsBI-RADS 5 constituted 12% of cases (95 cases), and BI-RADS 4 88% (698 cases). Within BI-RADS 4 subdivisions there were 359 cases in 4a (45.3%), 215 in 4b (27%), and 124 in 4c (15.6%). Overall PPV3 was 34.8%. BI-RADS 5 category PPV3 number was 97.89%. In category BI-RADS 4 the values of PPV3 equalled 26.22% without subdivision and 3.6%, 27.9%, and 88.7% for subcategories BI-RADS 4a, 4b, and 4c, respectively.
conclusionsBI-RADS categorisation by radiologists in the studied group matches the literature data according to achieved PPV and BI-RADS percentage distribution. The stratification of cancer risk among categories was proven with Mann-Whitney
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.