ReviewCureus2024
Comparative Effectiveness of Mammography, Ultrasound, and MRI in the Detection of Breast Carcinoma in Dense Breast Tissue: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microwave breast imaging: A review of clinical potential and technological advances.World journal of methodology · 2026Review
- MMBCFNet: multi modal hybrid deep learning framework for breast cancer detection using MRI, mammography, and ultrasound images.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Performance and Geographic Variation in Mammography Services: A Nine-Year Audit from Southern Jordan.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Liquid crystal thermography for breast cancer detection: principles, current evidence, limitations, and future directions.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2026Review
- Prediction of Ki-67 expression in invasive breast cancer with dual-modality radiomics.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A multi-scale hybrid ResNet-transformer with distance-aware learning for interpretable BI-RADS mammographic classification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the effect of peritumoral surrounding parenchymal features on radiological size measurement in breast cancer patients: a multicenter retrospective study (TR-BRC 2023-01).Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Computational Simulation of the Bioactivity of Selected Compounds Derived From the Sapium and Salvias Genera as Anticancer Agents.BioMed research international · 2026Article
- Construction of an ultrasound feature-based diagnostic model for predicting triple-negative breast cancer using 108 machine learning algorithm combinations.Journal of clinical imaging science · 2026Article
- Radiomics analysis of biplanar ultrasound images can discriminate non-mass breast carcinoma from mastitis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- An Automated Hybrid Deep Learning-based Model for Breast Cancer Detection using Mammographic ImagesCurrent medical imaging · 2026Article
- Predicting radiological regression in benign breast hyperplasia: the prolactin-to-estradiol ratio as a prognostic biomarker.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Liquid Biopsy and Multi-Omic Biomarkers in Breast Cancer: Innovations in Early Detection, Therapy Guidance, and Disease Monitoring.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Impact of breast reconstruction on quality of life among women after mastectomy.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2025Article
- Comparative Diagnostic Efficacy of Four Breast Imaging Modalities in Dense Breasts: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Comparative Assessment of Real-Time and Offline Short-Lag Spatial Coherence Imaging of Ultrasound Breast Masses.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2025Article
- Microbiota as diagnostic biomarkers: advancing early cancer detection and personalized therapeutic approaches through microbiome profiling.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Early detection and analysis of accurate breast cancer for improved diagnosis using deep supervised learning for enhanced patient outcomes.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- Exploring Radioiodinated Anastrozole and Epirubicin as AKT1-Targeted Radiopharmaceuticals in Breast Cancer: In Silico Analysis and Potential Therapeutic Effect with Functional Nuclear Imagining Implications.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Breast cancer histopathology, classification and clinical management: Current perspectives.Bioinformation · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to critically assess the effectiveness of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection of breast carcinoma within dense breast tissue. An exhaustive search of contemporary literature was undertaken, focusing on the diagnostic accuracy, false positive and negative rates, and clinical implications of the aforementioned imaging modalities. Each modality was assessed in isolation and side by side against the others to draw comparative inferences. While mammography remains a foundational imaging modality, its effectiveness waned within the context of dense breast tissue. Ultrasound demonstrated a strong differentiation prowess, especially among specific demographic cohorts. MRI, despite its exceptional precision and differentiation capabilities, exhibited a tendency for slightly elevated false positive rates. No single modality emerged as singularly superior for all cases. Instead, an integrated approach, combining the strengths of each modality based on individual patient profiles and clinical scenarios, is recommended. This tailored approach ensures optimized detection rates and minimizes diagnostic ambiguities, underscoring the significance of individualized patient care in the field of diagnostic radiology.
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.