ReviewThe British journal of radiology2020
Double reading in breast cancer screening: considerations for policy-making.
Review in The British journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Locate Then Classify: A Heterogeneous Dual-Teacher Consensus Framework for Semi-Supervised Mammogram Diagnosis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in breast cancer screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis of integration strategies.European journal of radiology open · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Mammography Ready for the Real-World: Turning Promise Into Reality.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Article
- MassSeg-Framework: A Breast Mass Detection and Segmentation Framework Based on Deep Learning and an Active Contour Model.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Enhancing Diagnostic Precision in Breast Cancer Detection: A Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Workshop Approach for Clinicians in the Southeast Asian Population.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Interobserver variability of recall decisions between mammography readers in the English NHS breast screening programme: A comparison of interobserver variability measures.European journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Adding artificial intelligence case malignancy scoring to reduce screen-reading workload in breast screening program: results of the retrospective REAI program.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- How Do Radiologists Currently Monitor AI in Radiology and What Challenges Do They Face? An Interview Study and Qualitative Analysis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Why we still miss breast cancers: strategies for improving mammography interpretation.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Results from a Swedish model-based analysis of the cost-effectiveness of AI-assisted digital mammography.European radiology · 2026Article
- Dual-modality CAD for breast cancer screening: dealing with discordant diagnosis between mammography and tomography.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Systematic double reading for oncological PET/CT scans: insights from a prospective multicentre study in 678 patients.EJNMMI reports · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Artificial intelligence for breast cancer screening in mammography (AI-STREAM): preliminary analysis of a prospective multicenter cohort study.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Implementation of a net benefit parameter in ROC curve decision thresholds for AI-powered mammography screening.Frontiers in big data · 2025Article
- AI as a Second Reader Can Reduce Radiologists' Workload and Increase Accuracy in Screening Mammography.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence Algorithm for Subclinical Breast Cancer Detection.JAMA network open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this article, we explore the evidence around the relative benefits and harms of breast cancer screening using a single radiologist to examine each female's mammograms for signs of cancer (single reading), or two radiologists (double reading). First, we briefly explore the historical evidence using film-screen mammography, before providing an in-depth description of evidence using digital mammography. We classify studies according to which exact version of double reading they use, because the evidence suggests that effectiveness of double reading is contingent on whether the two radiologists are blinded to one another's decisions, and how the decisions of the two radiologists are integrated. Finally, we explore the implications for future mammography, including using artificial intelligence as the second reader, and applications to more complex three-dimensional imaging techniques such as tomosynthesis.
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.