ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2025
Local Diagnostic Reference Levels in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 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.
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
introductionDiagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) are a guideline to indicate whether the radiation administered during medical procedures performed under routine conditions is unusually low or high. Currently, there are no national DRLs in Australia for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Mammography (DBT). Given the radiosensitivity of breast tissue, establishing DRLs for DBT is of great importance. This research aims to develop Local Diagnostic Reference Levels (LDRLs) for DBT that can be used as a guide for monitoring radiation delivery levels, and a Quality Assurance tool to assist in monitoring the performance of the mammography unit.
methodsAverage Glandular Dose (AGD) was collected from patient data through OpenREM software. Other data collected included breast density, compression force, compressed breast thickness (CBT), operative and treatment status. LDRLs were set using the 75th percentile (third quartile AGD values), categorised into four CBT ranges and compared against the median AGD values.
resultsLDRLs were similar for both craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique views. LDRLs for CBT ranges of 13-49 mm, 50-74 mm, 75-99 mm and 100-118 mm were calculated to be 1.5, 2.70, 3.90 and 4.70 mGy, respectively. There was no statistically significant correlation between breast density and AGD.
conclusionIt was found that CBT had a larger impact on dose than density. Significant differences were found between the LDRLs for each of the CBTs; therefore, setting a single LDRL for all CBTs may result in missing unacceptably high or low breast doses. LDRLs should be reviewed frequently to ensure the radiation dose patients receive is within optimal levels.
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.