ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Evaluating Factors Affecting Mean Glandular Dose in Mammography: Insights from a Retrospective Study in Dubai.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the Average Glandular Dose and Exposure Parameters in Mammography Based on Compressed Breast Thickness and Imaging Projection: A Single-Centre Study in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Quantitative Evaluation of Pectoral Muscle Visualisation as an Indicator of Positioning Quality in Screening Mammography.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveThis study evaluates the mean glandular dose (MGD) in mammography screening for women aged 40-69 in Dubai, based on a retrospective analysis of a dose survey involving 2599 participants.
methodsMGD was calculated using the Dance formula.
resultsThe average MGD was 0.96 ± 0.39 mGy for mediolateral oblique (MLO) views and 0.81 ± 0.33 mGy for craniocaudal (CC) views. Weak inverse correlations were found between age and organ dose (OD) for both views, while a direct relationship was observed between breast thickness and entrance skin dose (ESD). In adjusted models, ESD was strongly associated with MGD (β = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.97, 1.09), while OD showed a moderate association (β = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.40, 0.49). Significant variations in ESD, OD, and MGD were noted across age groups and breast thicknesses.
conclusionsLower MGD indicates reduced radiation exposure risk, while higher MGD in MLO views suggests improved imaging quality. Monitoring and optimizing MGD are essential for enhancing patient safety and screening efficacy.
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.