Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36005454›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging2022

Regression Analysis between the Different Breast Dose Quantities Reported in Digital Mammography and Patient Age, Breast Thickness, and Acquisition Parameters.

Salam Dhou, Entesar Dalah, Reda AlGhafeer, Aisha Hamidu, Abdulmunhem Obaideen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Salam DhouDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0002-8143-6417
Entesar DalahCollege of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University, Dubai P.O. Box 505055, United Arab Emirates.
Reda AlGhafeerBiomedical Engineering Graduate Program, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates.
Aisha HamiduBiomedical Engineering Graduate Program, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates.
Abdulmunhem ObaideenMedical Diagnostic Imaging Department, University Hospital Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 72772, United Arab Emirates.
American University of Sharjah · AEDubai Health Authority · AEUniversity of Sharjah · AE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

compressed breast thicknessfull-field digital mammography (FFDM)mean glandular dose (MGD)radiation dose

Identifiers

PMID36005454
PMCPMC9409844
OpenAlexW4289173231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.