ArticleJournal of digital imaging2022
Mammographic Density Assessment by Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Assisted Diagnosis: A Comparison with Automated Volumetric Assessment.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of three algorithms to measure breast density on mammograms in a population-based screening cohort.European radiology · 2026Article
- The Clinical Application of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Imaging: Current Insights, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of breast cancer · 2025Review
- Quantitative Changes in Breast Density and Mammographic Features Induced by Pregnancy and Lactation: A Longitudinal Study.Journal of breast imaging · 2025Article
- Enhancing detection of previously missed non-palpable breast carcinomas through artificial intelligence.European journal of radiology open · 2025Article
- Simulating mismatch between calibration and target population in AI for mammography the retrospective VAIB study.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Concordant and discordant breast density patterns by different approaches for assessing breast density and breast cancer risk.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Variability in Breast Density Estimation and Its Impact on Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.Journal of breast cancer · 2024Article
- Inter- and intra-observer variability of qualitative visual breast-composition assessment in mammography among Japanese physicians: a first multi-institutional observer performance study in Japan.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Article
- Performance of an Artificial Intelligence System for Breast Cancer Detection on Screening Mammograms from BreastScreen Norway.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Screening mammography performance according to breast density: a comparison between radiologists versus standalone intelligence detection.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- Strengths and challenges of the artificial intelligence in the assessment of dense breasts.BJR open · 2022Article
- Application of Computer 3D Modeling Technology in Graphic Image Design.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated and compared the mammographic density assessment of an artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis (AI-CAD) program using inter-rater agreements between radiologists and an automated density assessment program. Between March and May 2020, 488 consecutive mammograms of 488 patients (56.2 ± 10.9 years) were collected from a single institution. We assigned four classes of mammographic density based on BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) using commercial AI-CAD (Lunit INSIGHT MMG), and compared inter-rater agreements between radiologists, AI-CAD, and another commercial automated density assessment program (Volpara®). The inter-rater agreement between AI-CAD and the reader consensus was 0.52 with a matched rate of 68.2% (333/488). The inter-rater agreement between Volpara® and the reader consensus was similar to AI-CAD at 0.50 with a matched rate of 62.7% (306/488). The inter-rater agreement between AI-CAD and Volpara® was 0.54 with a matched rate of 61.5% (300/488). In conclusion, density assessments by AI-CAD showed fair agreement with those of radiologists, similar to the agreement between the commercial automated density assessment program and radiologists.
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.