ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Comparison of Mean Glandular Dose between Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Radiation dose comparison of photon-counting breast CT and mammography: A phantom study.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Assessing Mean Glandular Dose in Mammography in Jordan According to American College of Radiology (ACR) Standards.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
- A Critical Appraisal of System-Reported Organ Dose (OD) Versus Manually Calculated Mean Glandular Dose (MGD) in Dubai's Mammography Services.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Screening the Implant-Augmented Breast with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Is Tomosynthesis Necessary for Non-implant-Displaced Views?Journal of breast imaging · 2024Article
- Performance and usefulness evaluation of a software-based scatter correction technique for mammographic images.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Estimating Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Mammography in Dubai.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Analysis of dual-energy mammography subtraction technique for the dose and image quality evaluation using 3D-printed breast phantom.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
- Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in a Tertiary Hospital in Malaysia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Magnetic Levitation of Personalized Nanoparticle-Protein Corona as an Effective Tool for Cancer Detection.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Comparative Study of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) with and without Ultrasound versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in Detecting Breast Lesion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
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
Early detection of breast cancer is diagnosed using mammography, the gold standard in breast screening. However, its increased use also provokes radiation-induced breast malignancy. Thus, monitoring and regulating the mean glandular dose (MGD) is essential. The purpose of this study was to determine MGD for full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in the radiology department of a single centre. We also analysed the exposure factors as a function of breast thickness. A total of 436 patients underwent both FFDM and DBT. MGD was auto calculated by the mammographic machine for each projection. Patients' data included compressed breast thickness (CBT), peak kilovoltage (kVp), milliampere-seconds (mAs) and MGD (mGy). Result analysis showed that there is a significant difference in MGD between the two systems, namely FFDM and DBT. However, the MGD values in our centre were comparable to other centres, as well as the European guideline (<2.5 mGy) for a standard breast. Although DBT improves the clinical outcome and quality of diagnosis, the risk of radiation-induced carcinogenesis should not be neglected. Regular quality control testing on mammography equipment must be performed for dose monitoring in women following a screening mammography in the future.
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.