ArticleJournal of imaging2022
Regression Analysis between the Different Breast Dose Quantities Reported in Digital Mammography and Patient Age, Breast Thickness, and Acquisition Parameters.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence Across the Radiology Workflow: A Nine-Stage Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Investigating the Average Glandular Dose and Exposure Parameters in Mammography Based on Compressed Breast Thickness and Imaging Projection: A Single-Centre Study in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Radiation Risk in 2D Mammography Screening: A Scoping Review of Modelling Strategies and Emerging AI Applications.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- 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
- Evaluating Factors Affecting Mean Glandular Dose in Mammography: Insights from a Retrospective Study in Dubai.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Screening Mammography Diagnostic Reference Level System According to Compressed Breast Thickness: Dubai Health.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Screening mammography is considered the primary imaging modality for the early detection of breast cancer. The radiation dose from mammography increases the patients' risk of radiation-induced cancer. The mean glandular dose (MGD), or the average glandular dose (AGD), provides an estimate of the absorbed dose of radiation by the glandular tissues of a breast. In this paper, MGD is estimated for the craniocaudal (CC) and mediolateral-oblique (MLO) views using entrance skin dose (ESD), X-ray spectrum information, patient age, breast glandularity, and breast thickness. Moreover, a regression analysis is performed to evaluate the impact of mammography acquisition parameters, age, and breast thickness on the estimated MGD and other machine-produced dose quantities, namely, ESD and organ dose (OD). Furthermore, a correlation study is conducted to evaluate the correlation between the ESD and OD, and the estimated MGD per image view. This retrospective study was applied to a dataset of 2035 mammograms corresponding to a cohort of 486 subjects with an age range of 28-86 years who underwent screening mammography examinations. Linear regression metrics were calculated to evaluate the strength of the correlations. The mean (and range) MGD for the CC view was 0.832 (0.110-3.491) mGy and for the MLO view was 0.995 (0.256-2.949) mGy. All the mammography dose quantities strongly correlated with tube exposure (mAs): ESD (R
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.