ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Evaluating the features of breast lesions identified by bimodal breast examination: a real-world study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. 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.
- A Deep Learning Model Integrating Ultrasound Images and Multidimensional Clinical Information for Differentiating Benign and Malignant Non-Mass Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Several image-based diagnostic methods have been developed to examine the features of breast lesions among women, while the value of combining palpation imaging and ultrasound by a bimodal breast examination system is still unknown. Methods: A real-world study was conducted among 424 patients who visited Fujian Maternal and Child Health Hospital and Fujian Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, and used the Bimodal Breast Exam (BBE) systems which combines palpation imaging and ultrasound imaging. Among them, 97 patients had additional ultrasound, mammogram, or pathological examination. These patients were used to evaluate the consistency and efficacy of the BBE in interpreting the features of breast lesions as compared to results of ultrasound, mammogram, and pathological examinations. Results: The BBE system detected 1517 lesions with palpation imaging, 1126 lesions with ultrasound examination (950 solid lesions and 176 cysts), and 391 non mass lesions. Among them, 404 patients were diagnosed as benign and 20 were diagnosed as malignant tumor. However, 12, 9 and 4 cases were diagnosed as malignant tumors by ultrasound, mammogram and pathological examination, respectively. Compared with the integrative results of ultrasound, mammogram and pathology, the sensitivity of BBE is 55.6%, and the specificity is 90.9%, with a kappa coefficient of 0.387 (0.110, 0.665), indicating moderate consistency. Conclusions: In clinical practice, BBE can be used to evaluate features of breast lesions with a high specificity. The diagnostic efficacy is comparable to the integrative results of ultrasound, mammography, and pathological examination.
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.