Observational study in Radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
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
8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Jeffrey A TiceFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0002-9857-2028
Charlotte C GardFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0001-7201-4450
Diana L MigliorettiFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0002-5547-1833
Brian L SpragueFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0001-7948-8317
Anna N A TostesonFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0001-7718-8943
Bonnie N JoeFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0001-9333-1463
Thao-Quyen H HoFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0001-6314-937X
Karla KerlikowskeFrom the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (J.A.T.), and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (B.N.J.), University of California, San Francisco, 1545 Divisadero St, Suite 309, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs and Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM (C.C.G.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Davis, Calif (D.L.M., T.Q.H.H.); Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Wash (D.L.M.); Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (A.N.A.T.); and Department of Training and Scientific Research, University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (T.Q.H.H.).ORCID 0000-0001-8793-8779
University of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of California System · USDartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice · USKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · USNew Mexico State University · USUniversity of Vermont · US
Funding
Translational Engineering in Cancer (TEC)P30CA023108 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Fred W Kolling IV · 1985 to 2026
$91.3M
Risk-based Imaging Strategies to Improve Breast Cancer Surveillance OutcomesP01CA154292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KARLA M KERLIKOWSKE · 2011 to 2026
$52.9M
Vermont Screening Process Documentation UnitU54CA163303 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI SPRAGUE, BRIAN L · 2011 to 2017
$6.4M
Comparative effectiveness of breast imaging modalities: a natural experimentR01HS018366 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI RAUSCHER, GARTH H · 2010 to 2014
Background Consistency in reporting Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density on mammograms is important because breast density is used for breast cancer risk assessment and is reported directly to women and clinicians to inform decisions about supplemental screening. Purpose To assess the consistency of BI-RADS density reporting between digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM) and evaluate density as a breast cancer risk factor when assessed using DM versus DBT. Materials and Methods The Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium is a prospective cohort study of women undergoing mammography with DM or DBT. This secondary analysis included women aged 40-79 years who underwent at least two screening mammography examinations less than 36 months apart. Percentage agreement and κ statistic were estimated for pairs of BI-RADS density assessments. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) of breast density as a risk factor for invasive breast cancer. Results A total of 403 326 pairs of mammograms from 342 149 women were evaluated. There were no significant differences in breast density assessment in pairs consisting of one DM and one DBT examination (57 516 of 74 729 [77%]; κ = 0.64), two DM examinations (238 678 of 301 743 [79%]; κ = 0.67), and two DBT examinations (20 763 of 26 854 [77%]; κ = 0.65). Results were similar when restricting the analyses to pairs read by the same radiologist. The breast cancer HRs for breast density were similar for DM and DBT (
Indexed as
Breast DensityAdultAgedFemaleHumansMammographyMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRegistriesReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentSEER ProgramUnited States
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.
Comparing Mammographic Density Assessed by Digital Breast Tomosynthesis or Digital Mammography: The Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. · full record | OpenQuestion