ArticleEuropean journal of breast health2020
Comparison of Qualitative and Volumetric Assessments of Breast Density and Analyses of Breast Compression Parameters and Breast Volume of Women in Bahcesehir Mammography Screening Project.
Article in European journal of breast health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mammographic density by time and breast: a retrospective cohort study from BreastScreen Norway.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- Concordant and discordant breast density patterns by different approaches for assessing breast density and breast cancer risk.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Validity of computed mean compressed fibroglandular tissue thickness and breast composition for stratification of masking risk in Japanese women.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Article
- Prediction of breast cancer risk by automated volumetric breast density measurement.Japanese journal of radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to compare visual and quantitative measurements of breast density and to reveal the density profile with compression characteristics. MATERIALS AND
methodsScreening mammograms of 1399 women between May 2014 and May 2015 were evaluated by using Volpara 4
results1399 mammograms were distributed as follows: 12.7% VDG1, 39.3% VDG2, 34.1% VDG3, 13.9% VDG4 according to the 4th edition of Volpara; 1.2% VDG1, 46% VDG2, 36.8% VDG3, 15.9% VDG4 according to the 5
conclusionVisual assessment of breast density doesn't correlate well with volumetric assessments. Obtaining additional information about physical parameters and breast profile by the results of quantified methods is important for breast cancer risk assessments and prevention strategies.
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.