English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) is a potential supplement for mammogram screening. This study aimed to evaluate and feasibility of EIT as opposed to mammography and to determine pain perception with both imaging methods. Women undergoing screening mammography at the Radiology Department of National University of Malaysia Medical Centre were randomly selected for EIT imaging. All women were requested to give a pain score after each imaging session. Two independent raters were chosen to define the image findings of EIT. A total of 164 women in the age range from 40 to 65-year-old participated and were divided into two groups; normal and abnormal. EIT sensitivity and specificity for rater 1 were 69.4% and 63.3, whereas for rater 2 they were 55.3% and 57.0% respectively. The reliability for each rater ranged between good to very good (p&lt;0.05). Quantitative values of EIT showed there were significant differences in all values between groups (ANCOVA, p&lt;0.05). Interestingly, EIT scored a median pain score of 1.51±0.75 whereas mammography scored 4.15±0.87 (Mann Whitney U test, p&lt;0.05). From these quantitative values, EIT has the potential as a health discriminating index. Its ability to replace image findings from mammography needs further investigation.

asian pacific journal of cancer prevention

Validation of Electrical Impedance Tomography Qualitative and Quantitative Values and Comparison of the Numeric Pain Distress Score against Mammography