ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Quantitative Breast Density in Contrast-Enhanced Mammography.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of serologic biomarkers "liquid biopsy" in the fight against breast cancer: From biological foundations to clinical impact.iScience · 2026Review
- AAPM/EFOMP TG282 versus dance dosimetry for digital breast tomosynthesis in the assessment pathway of a breast screening program.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Clinical Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Versus Breast MRI in Women at Increased Breast Cancer Risk.Cancers · 2026Article
- Beyond Cancer Detection: An AI Framework for Multidimensional Risk Profiling on Contrast-Enhanced Mammography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Contrast-enhanced mammography improves patient access to functional breast imaging.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2025Review
- Contrast-enhanced mammography in high-dense breasts: a narrative review.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025Review
- Breast density quantification in dual-energy mammography using virtual anthropomorphic phantoms.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) demonstrates a potential role in personalized screening models, in particular for women at increased risk and women with dense breasts. In this study, volumetric breast density (VBD) measured in CEM images was compared with VBD obtained from digital mammography (DM) or tomosynthesis (DBT) images. A total of 150 women who underwent CEM between March 2019 and December 2020, having at least a DM/DBT study performed before/after CEM, were included. Low-energy CEM (LE-CEM) and DM/DBT images were processed with automatic software to obtain the VBD. VBDs from the paired datasets were compared by Wilcoxon tests. A multivariate regression model was applied to analyze the relationship between VBD differences and multiple independent variables certainly or potentially affecting VBD. Median VBD was comparable for LE-CEM and DM/DBT (12.73% vs. 12.39%), not evidencing any statistically significant difference (
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.