ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in a Tertiary Hospital in Malaysia.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- AAPM/EFOMP TG282 versus dance dosimetry for digital breast tomosynthesis in the assessment pathway of a breast screening program.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Local Diagnostic Reference Levels in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
- Assessing the Organ Dose in Diagnostic Imaging with Digital Tomosynthesis System Using TLD100H Dosimeters.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- Establishing Diagnostic Reference Levels in Digital Mammography from Eight Mammography Units Using over 30,000 Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Lifetime Attributable Risk in Mammography Screenings in Dubai: The Influence of Breast Thickness and Age on Radiation Exposure.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Screening Mammography Diagnostic Reference Level System According to Compressed Breast Thickness: Dubai Health.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Service Quality and Related Factors in Primary Health Care Services: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Demonstration of Japanese radiographic examination codes in establishing typical values for a wide variety of general radiography examinations.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- National diagnostic reference levels for digital diagnostic and screening mammography in Uganda.PloS one · 2024Article
- Estimating Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Mammography in Dubai.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A set of national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) was established in Malaysia for a range of breast thicknesses in 2013, but no updates for full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). Due to the increasing number of DBTs used and concern over radiation exposure, this study aimed to explore and establish local diagnostic reference levels for FFDM and DBT in Malaysia health facilities at different compressed breast thickness (CBT) ranges. The CBT, kilovoltage peak (kVp), Entrance surface dose (ESD), and average glandular dose (AGD) were retrospectively extracted from the mammography Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) header. The 75th and 95th percentile values were obtained for the AGD distribution of each mammography projection for three sets of CBT range. The difference in AGD values between FFDM and DBT at three CBT ranges was determined. The DRLs for FFDM were 1.13 mGy, 1.52 mGy, and 2.87 mGy, while DBT were 1.18 mGy, 1.88 mGy, and 2.78 mGy at CBT ranges of 20−39 mm, 40−59 mm, and 60−99 mm, respectively. The AGD of DBT was significantly higher than FFDM for both mammographic views (p < 0.005). All three CBT groups showed a significant difference in AGD values for FFDM and DBT (p < 0.005). The local DRLs from this study were lower than the national DRLs, with the AGD of FFDM significantly lower than DBT.
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.