ArticleBMJ open2022
Artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance breast cancer screening: protocol for population-based cohort study of cancer detection.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Frequency and characteristics of errors by artificial intelligence (AI) in reading screening mammography: a systematic review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Pooled it
- The Role of Synthetic Data and Generative AI in Breast Imaging: Promise, Pitfalls, and Pathways Forward.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Global mapping of artificial intelligence applications in breast cancer from 1988-2024: a machine learning approach.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Review
- Racial Differences in Screening Eligibility by Breast Density After State-Level Insurance Expansion.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Simulating mismatch between calibration and target population in AI for mammography the retrospective VAIB study.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Simulated arbitration of discordance between radiologists and artificial intelligence interpretation of breast cancer screening mammograms.Journal of medical screening · 2025Article
- Finding Consensus on Trust in AI in Health Care: Recommendations From a Panel of International Experts.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Surgery: Cognition, Usage Patterns and Implementation Barriers of DeepSeek Among Healthcare Professionals in China's Tertiary Hospitals.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Modeling Radiologists' Assessments to Explore Pairing Strategies for Optimized Double Reading of Screening Mammograms.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Article
- Promoting Artificial Intelligence for Global Breast Cancer Risk Prediction and Screening in Adult Women: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Chimp Optimization Algorithm Influenced Type-2 Intuitionistic Fuzzy C-Means Clustering-Based Breast Cancer Detection System.Cancers · 2023Article
- The Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence Applications in Breast Cancer Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Breast Cancer Screening: Evaluation of FDA Device Regulation and Future Recommendations.JAMA internal medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionArtificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for interpreting mammograms have the potential to improve the effectiveness of population breast cancer screening programmes if they can detect cancers, including interval cancers, without contributing substantially to overdiagnosis. Studies suggesting that AI has comparable or greater accuracy than radiologists commonly employ 'enriched' datasets in which cancer prevalence is higher than in population screening. Routine screening outcome metrics (cancer detection and recall rates) cannot be estimated from these datasets, and accuracy estimates may be subject to spectrum bias which limits generalisabilty to real-world screening. We aim to address these limitations by comparing the accuracy of AI and radiologists in a cohort of consecutive of women attending a real-world population breast cancer screening programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A retrospective, consecutive cohort of digital mammography screens from 109 000 distinct women was assembled from BreastScreen WA (BSWA), Western Australia's biennial population screening programme, from November 2016 to December 2017. The cohort includes 761 screen-detected and 235 interval cancers. Descriptive characteristics and results of radiologist double-reading will be extracted from BSWA outcomes data collection. Mammograms will be reinterpreted by a commercial AI algorithm (DeepHealth). AI accuracy will be compared with that of radiologist single-reading based on the difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Cancer detection and recall rates for combined AI-radiologist reading will be estimated by pairing the first radiologist read per screen with the AI algorithm, and compared with estimates for radiologist double-reading. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has ethical approval from the Women and Newborn Health Service Ethics Committee (EC00350) and the Curtin University Human Research Ethics Committee (HRE2020-0316). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. Results will also be disseminated to stakeholders in Australian breast cancer screening programmes and policy makers in population screening.
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.