Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32876835›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2021

Identifying normal mammograms in a large screening population using artificial intelligence.

Kristina Lång, Magnus Dustler, Victor Dahlblom, Anna Åkesson, Ingvar Andersson, Sophia Zackrisson

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 57 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05048095 completednot on this map

The Use of AI as a Third Reader and During Consensus in a Double Reading Breast Cancer Screening Program in Sweden

TypeobservationalSponsorOstergotland County Council, SwedenRan2021 to 2022Enrolled15,500ConditionsBreast CancerArmsAI cancer detection system
NCT07075679 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Cancer Screening: Impact of AI-Assisted Single Reading by One Radiologist on Screening Quality Indicators Compared to Standard Double Reading by Two Radiologists Without AI

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital OlomoucRan2025 to 2028Enrolled8,000ConditionsBreast Cancer Screening, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Breast Cancer Screening and DiagnosisArmsGroup with AI iCAD version 3, Group without AI
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 124 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kristina LångDiagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Inga Maria Nilssons gata 47, SE-20502, Malmö, Sweden. kristina.lang@med.lu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9250-1897
Magnus DustlerDiagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Inga Maria Nilssons gata 47, SE-20502, Malmö, Sweden.
Victor DahlblomDiagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Inga Maria Nilssons gata 47, SE-20502, Malmö, Sweden.
Anna ÅkessonClinical Studies Sweden - Forum South, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Ingvar AnderssonDiagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Inga Maria Nilssons gata 47, SE-20502, Malmö, Sweden.
Sophia ZackrissonDiagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Inga Maria Nilssons gata 47, SE-20502, Malmö, Sweden.
Lund University · SESkåne University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to identify normal mammograms in a screening population.

methodsIn this retrospective study, 9581 double-read mammography screening exams including 68 screen-detected cancers and 187 false positives, a subcohort of the prospective population-based Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial, were analysed with a deep learning-based AI system. The AI system categorises mammograms with a cancer risk score increasing from 1 to 10. The effect on cancer detection and false positives of excluding mammograms below different AI risk thresholds from reading by radiologists was investigated. A panel of three breast radiologists assessed the radiographic appearance, type, and visibility of screen-detected cancers assigned low-risk scores (≤ 5). The reduction of normal exams, cancers, and false positives for the different thresholds was presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

resultsIf mammograms scored 1 and 2 were excluded from screen-reading, 1829 (19.1%; 95% CI 18.3-19.9) exams could be removed, including 10 (5.3%; 95% CI 2.1-8.6) false positives but no cancers. In total, 5082 (53.0%; 95% CI 52.0-54.0) exams, including 7 (10.3%; 95% CI 3.1-17.5) cancers and 52 (27.8%; 95% CI 21.4-34.2) false positives, had low-risk scores. All, except one, of the seven screen-detected cancers with low-risk scores were judged to be clearly visible.

conclusionsThe evaluated AI system can correctly identify a proportion of a screening population as cancer-free and also reduce false positives. Thus, AI has the potential to improve mammography screening efficiency. KEY POINTS: • Retrospective study showed that AI can identify a proportion of mammograms as normal in a screening population. • Excluding normal exams from screening using AI can reduce false positives.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerHumansMammographyMass ScreeningProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesArtificial intelligenceBreast cancerMammographyMass screening

Identifiers

PMID32876835
PMCPMC7880910
OpenAlexW3081726800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.