ArticleBMC medical imaging2023
Subcategorization of suspicious non-mass-like enhancement lesions(BI-RADS-MRI Category4).
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiparametric MRI for non-mass enhancement breast lesions: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study.European radiology · 2026Article
- An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of Dynamic Contrast Enhancement and Diffusion-Weighted MRI in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Non-Mass Enhancement Lesions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging features and diagnostic value analysis of non-mass enhancement lesions of the breast.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Prognostic Molecular Biomarkers in Breast Cancer Lesions with Non-Mass Enhancement on MR.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Are we ready to stratify BI-RADS 4 MRI lesions?Radiologia brasileiraArticle
- Breast MRI-the Importance of Type II and III Dynamic Curves Evaluation and Framing in BI-RADS 4C and 5 Score.Current health sciences journalArticle
- New developments in the BI-RADS for MRI.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to providing a reliable method that has good compliance and is easy to master to improve the accuracy of NMLE diagnosis.
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed 122 cases of breast non-mass-like enhancement (NMLE) lesions confirmed by postoperative histology. MRI features and clinical features of benign and malignant non-mass enhancement breast lesions were compared by using independent sample t test, χ
resultsThe distribution (odds ratio (OR) = 8.70), internal enhancement pattern (OR = 6.29), ADC value (OR = 5.56), and vascular sign (OR = 2.84) of the lesions were closely related to the benignity and malignancy of the lesions. These signs were used to build the MRI multiparameter model for differentiating benign and malignant non-mass enhancement breast lesions. ROC analysis revealed that its optimal diagnostic cut-off value was 5. The diagnostic specificity and sensitivity were 87.01% and 82.22%, respectively. Lesions with 1-6 points were considered BI-RADS category 4 lesions, and the positive predictive values of subtypes 4a, 4b, and 4c lesions were15.79%, 31.25%, and 77.78%, respectively.
conclusionsComprehensively analyzing the features of MRI of non-mass enhancement breast lesions and building the multiparameter differential diagnosis model could improve the differential diagnostic performance of benign and malignant lesions.
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.