ArticleJournal of imaging2025
Establishing Diagnostic Reference Levels for Mammography Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, Contrast Enhance, Implants, Spot Compression, Magnification and Stereotactic Biopsy in Dubai Health Sector.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. 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.
- Decadal Changes in Institutional Diagnostic Reference Levels for X-Ray Angiography: A Retrospective Comparative Study.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- AAPM/EFOMP TG282 versus dance dosimetry for digital breast tomosynthesis in the assessment pathway of a breast screening program.Medical physics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this patient dose review is to establish a thorough diagnostic reference level (DRL) system. This entails calculating a DRL value for each possible image technique/view considered to perform a diagnostic mammogram in our practice. Diagnostic mammographies from a total of 1191 patients who underwent a diagnostic mammogram study in our designated diagnostic mammography center were collected and retrospectively analyzed. The DRL representing our health sector was set as the median of the mean glandular dose (MGD) for each possible image technique/view, including the 2D standard bilateral craniocaudal (LCC/RCC) and mediolateral oblique (LMLO/RMLO), the 2D bilateral spot compression CC and MLO (RSCC/LSCC and RSMLO/LSMLO), the 2D bilateral spot compression with magnification (RMSCC/LMSCC and RMSMLO/LMSMLO), the 3D digital breast tomosynthesis CC and MLO (RCC/LCC and RMLO/LMLO), the 2D bilateral implant CC and MLO (RIMCC/LIMCC and RIMMLO/LIMMLO), the 2D bilateral contrast enhanced CC and MLO (RCECC/LCECC and RCEMLO/LCEMLO) and the 2D bilateral stereotactic biopsy guided CC (SBRCC/SBLCC). This patient dose review revealed that the highest MGD was associated with the 2D bilateral spot compression with magnification (MSCC/MSMLO) image view. For the compressed breast thickness (CBT) group 60-69 mm, the median and 75th percentile of the MGD values obtained were MSCC: 3.35 and 3.96, MSMLO: 4.14 and 5.25 mGy respectively. Obvious MGD variations were witnessed across the different possible views even for the same CBT group. Our results are in line with the published DRLs when using same statistical quantity and CBT group.
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.