ReviewJournal of breast imaging
BI-RADS 3 Assessment on MRI: A Lesion-Based Review for Breast Radiologists.
Review in Journal of breast imaging. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Second-Look Ultrasonography for Evaluating BIRADS 3 and 4 Non Mass-Enhancement: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Frequency and outcomes of new or suspicious MRI findings on breast MRI for patients on neoadjuvant therapy.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Characteristics of Non-mass Enhancement in Contrast-enhanced Breast MRI and Associations with Malignancy.Journal of Cancer · 2025Article
- Reliability of Kaiser Score in Assessing Additional Breast Lesions Identified on Staging MRI in Patients with Breast Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Follow-up results of BI-RADS 3 lesions on magnetic resonance imaging: a retrospective studyDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlike mammography and US, limited data exist to establish well-defined criteria for MRI findings that have a ≤2% likelihood of malignancy. Therefore, determining which findings are appropriate for a BI-RADS 3 assessment on MRI remains challenging and variable among breast radiologists. Emerging data suggest that BI-RADS 3 should be limited to baseline MRI examinations (or examinations with less than two years of prior comparisons) performed for high-risk screening and only used for masses with all of the typical morphological and kinetic features suggestive of a fibroadenoma or dominant enhancing T2 hypointense foci that is distinct from background parenchymal enhancement and without suspicious kinetics. This article presents an updated discussion of BI-RADS 3 assessment (probably benign) for breast MRI using current evidence.
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.