ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2025
Investigating the effect of adding comparisons with prior mammograms to standalone digital breast tomosynthesis screening.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2025. 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.
- Introduction to the JMI Special Issue on Advances in Breast Imaging.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose is to retrospectively investigate how the addition of prior and concurrent mammograms affects wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening false-positive recall rates, malignancy scoring, and recall agreement. Approach: A total of 200 cases were selected from the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial. They consist of 150 recalled cases [30 true positives (TPs), 120 false positives (FPs), and 50 healthy, non-recalled true-negative (TN) cases]. The positive cases were categorized based on being recalled by either DBT, digital mammography (DM), or both. Each case had DBT, synthetic mammography (SM), and DM (prior screening round) images. Five radiologists participated in a reading study where detection, risk of malignancy, and recall were assessed. They read each case twice, once using only DBT and once using DBT together with SM and DM priors. Results: The results showed a significant reduction in recall rates for all FP categories, as well as for the TN cases, when adding SM and prior DM to DBT. This resulted also in a significant increase in recall agreement for these categories, with more of the negative cases being recalled by few or no readers. These categories were overall rated as appearing more malignant in the DBT reading arm. For the TP categories, there was a significant decrease in recalls for DM-recalled cancers ( Conclusions: Similar to the documented effect of priors in DM screening, we suggest that added two-dimensional priors improve the specificity of DBT screening but may reduce the sensitivity.
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.