ArticleCureus2019
Mammographic Criteria for Determining the Diagnostic Accuracy of Microcalcifications in the Detection of Malignant Breast Lesions.
Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breast Disease Patterns Among Patients Presenting for Mammography in a Major Hospital in the Volta Region of Ghana: A Five-Year Descriptive Retrospective Study.International journal of breast cancer · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Breast cancer is a progressive disease, with conditions secondary to primary breast cancer being among the more common causes of malignancy-related deaths in women. Early diagnosis can halt disease progression and significantly improve patient's survival. Microcalcifications detected on mammograms may be an indicator of breast cancer. This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of microcalcifications seen on mammograms for the detection of malignant breast disease when compared with histopathology. Materials and methods This study enrolled 144 women referred to the Radiology Department of Aga Khan University Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan, for mammograms and who were found to have suspicious microcalcifications, for which they underwent subsequent biopsy with histopathology over one year. The accuracy of microcalcifications, along with their sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV), were assessed relative to histopathology results. Results Compared with histopathology results, microcalcifications had a sensitivity of 88%, and specificity of 62.8%, a PPV of 55.7%, and an NPV of 90.8%. The overall accuracy of microcalcifications was 71.5%. Conclusions The presence of microcalcifications on mammograms may predict breast malignancy. Studies with larger numbers of patients are required to determine whether microcalcifications have higher specificity and PPV relative to breast histopathology.
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.