ArticleCureus2026
Comparative Evaluation of Infrared Thermography and Mammography in the Detection of Breast Cancer.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of infrared thermography for detecting breast carcinoma and to compare its performance with that of standard mammography. A secondary objective was to assess the potential role of thermography as a supplementary, non-invasive, radiation-free imaging modality, particularly in settings with limited access to conventional breast imaging. METHODOLOGY: A diagnostic comparison study was conducted over 18 months at JSS Hospitals, Mysuru, involving 30 female patients aged 20-60 years with breast tumors. All participants underwent infrared thermography, mammography, and histopathological analysis. Thermograms showing temperature variations of ≥3°C were considered malignant. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28 (Released 2021; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York), and diagnostic accuracy was assessed based on sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsOf the 34 breast lesions evaluated, 24 (70.6%) were malignant and 10 (29.4%) were benign. On mammography, positive findings were observed in 23 (95.8%) malignant cases and one (10%) benign case. Infrared thermography demonstrated no thermal change in all benign and six (25%) malignant cases. Mammography detected 23 of 24 malignant lesions, yielding an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.967 (p < 0.05). Infrared thermography detected 18 of 24 malignant lesions, with an AUC of 0.875 (p < 0.001).
conclusionInfrared thermography demonstrated high specificity and a strong PPV; however, its low sensitivity limits its standalone diagnostic utility in breast cancer detection. Nevertheless, owing to its cost-effectiveness, portability, and radiation-free properties, thermography may serve as a valuable supplementary tool, particularly in low-resource settings and among younger women with dense breast tissue.
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.