Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32143121›Full record

ArticlePhysica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB)2020

Characterization of the imaging settings in screening mammography using a tracking and reporting system: A multi-center and multi-vendor analysis.

Bruno Barufaldi, Samantha P Zuckerman, Regina B Medeiros, Andrew D Maidment, Homero Schiabel

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

5 authors.

Bruno BarufaldiUniversity of Pennsylvania, Department of Radiology, 3620 Hamilton Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: Bruno.Barufaldi@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Samantha P ZuckermanUniversity of Pennsylvania, Department of Radiology, 3620 Hamilton Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: Samantha.Zuckerman@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Regina B MedeirosFederal University of Sao Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, 740 Rua Botucatu, Sao Paulo, SP 04023-062, Brazil.
Andrew D MaidmentUniversity of Pennsylvania, Department of Radiology, 3620 Hamilton Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: Andrew.Maidment@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Homero SchiabelUniversity of Sao Paulo, Department of Electrical Engineering, 400 Trabalhador Sao-Carlense, Sao Carlos, SP 13566-590, Brazil. Electronic address: homero@sc.usp.br.

Funding

Penn Center for Innovation in Personalized Breast ScreeningU54CA163313 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI ARMSTRONG, KATRINA, SCHNALL, MITCHELL D. · 2011 to 2017
$7.4M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA163313
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A tracking and reporting system was developed to monitor radiation dose in X-ray breast imaging. We used our tracking system to characterize and compare the mammographic practices of five breast imaging centers located in the United States and Brazil. Clinical data were acquired using eight mammography systems comprising three modalities: computed radiography (CR), full-field digital mammography (FFDM), and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). Our database consists of metadata extracted from 334,234 images. We analyzed distributions and correlations of compressed breast thickness (CBT), compression force, target-filter combinations, X-ray tube voltage, and average glandular dose (AGD). AGD reference curves were calculated based on AGD distributions as a function of CBT. These curves represent an AGD reference for a particular population and system. Differences in AGD and imaging settings were attributed to a combination of factors, such as improvements in technology, imaging protocol, and patient demographics. The tracking system allows the comparison of various imaging settings used in screening mammography, as well as the tracking of patient- and population-specific breast data collected from different populations.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBrazilBreastBreast NeoplasmsCompressive StrengthEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMammographyPhantoms, ImagingQuality Assurance, Health CareRadiation DosageRadiographic Image EnhancementRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedComputed radiographyDICOMDigital breast tomosynthesisDigital mammographyQuality assurance

Identifiers

PMID32143121
PMCPMC7187399

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.