ArticleCureus2023
Novel Technologies in Breast Imaging: A Scoping Review.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of the diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound, MRI, and combined examination in benign and malignant breast tumors.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Guidance for Canadian Breast Cancer Practice: National Consensus Recommendations for Clinical Staging of Patients Newly Diagnosed with Breast Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- miR-125 in Breast Cancer Etiopathogenesis: An Emerging Role as a Biomarker in Differential Diagnosis, Regenerative Medicine, and the Challenges of Personalized Medicine.Non-coding RNA · 2024Review
- Breast Imaging Physics in Mammography (Part II).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Breast Imaging Physics in Mammography (Part I).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer is one of the leading causes of death in the United States and can cause considerable suffering for not only the patient but their families as well. The current mainstay of screening is mammography, although this screening modality has its drawbacks. Multiple technologies have been recently explored in hopes of increasing breast cancer detection rates and decreasing false positive rates. Overall, improving breast cancer screening techniques has the potential to decrease cost, patient anxiety, and the use of unnecessary procedures. This review discusses multiple modalities including digital breast tomosynthesis, contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography (CE DE DM), MRI with diffusion-weighted sequences and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. This paper was written with the objective of synthesizing information across several databases to provide clinicians with a more accessible tool to understand the underlying concepts behind these imaging modalities, as well as present reviewed data which highlights the benefits and drawbacks of these breast cancer-detecting techniques.
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.