ArticleBMC medical imaging2022
The values of elastic quantitative and semi-quantitative indexes measured from different frequencies in the establishment of prediction models for breast tumor diagnosis.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound elastography and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR in benign and malignant breast masses.American journal of translational research · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo obtain the elastic quantitative and semi-quantitative indexes of solid breast masses using ultrasound linear array probes with two different frequencies, and to construct prediction models and evaluate their diagnostic values.
methodsA total of 92 patients who were scheduled for surgical treatment on solid breast masses were enrolled in this study. Linear array probes with two frequencies, 9-3 MHz (L9 group) and 14-5 MHz (L14 group), were used for sound touch elastography and strain elastography before surgery, and the maximum elasticity value (Emax), average elasticity value (Emean), minimum elasticity value (Emin), standard deviation (SD)(in kPa), elasticity ratio (E), and strain ratio to fat (SRf) were recorded and calculated for the breast mass (A) and surrounding tissues (Shell). The elastic characteristic indexes of the L9 group and L14 group were compared, and the prediction models of these two groups were constructed using Logistic regression method.
resultsThe diagnostic performance of the prediction model based on L9 group was better than the model based on L14 group (AUC: 0.904 vs. 0.810, P = 0.0343, z = 2.116) and the best single index EMax-shell-L9 (P = 0.0398, z = 2.056). The sensitivity of L9 based model was 85.19% and the specificity was 84.21%.
conclusionThe prediction model based on quantitative and semi-quantitative elastic ultrasound indexes from L9-3 probe exhibited better performance, which could improve the diagnostic accuracy for malignant breast tumors.
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.