ReviewJournal of medical radiation sciences2022
A review of mammographic image quality in Papua New Guinea.
Review in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A review of mammographic image quality in Papua New Guinea.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2022Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo report for the first time the image quality of mammograms performed in Papua New Guinea (PNG) using the Perfect, Good, Moderate, Inadequate (PGMI) image evaluation system (IES); and to benchmark the image quality against BreastScreen Australia (BSA) National Accreditation Standards (NAS).
methodsA retrospective image quality analysis of the de-identified mammograms of 102 women imaged at the Port Moresby General Hospital (PMGH) was undertaken using the PGMI IES. Each craniocaudal (CC) and mediolateral oblique (MLO) image was assigned a grade and the reasons for the grade recorded. Age was recorded in years. Simple frequency analysis was undertaken and comparison with BSA NAS 2.4 was made.
resultsWomen were aged between 25 and 74 years. There were 111 CC views and 109 MLO views. The most frequent individual grade for the CC view was G (83.8%) and for the MLO view M (72.48%); and for a routine series (four images), P and G combined (14.8%). Non-visualisation of the IMA (28%), nipple not in profile (26%) and short length of pectoral muscle (12%) were the most cited reasons for assigning an M grade.
conclusionThe reported image quality is not commensurate with that required by BSA (P and G > 50%) and while common positioning errors can be rectified through education and training, it is also important to recognise the complex challenges faced by PNG radiographers in obtaining mammographic images that extend beyond education and training and reflect the emerging nature of the modality as well as wider health, economic and other issues. This work raises the need for national standards, dedicated equipment, and radiographer education to best serve the women of PNG.
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.