ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Possible strategies for use of artificial intelligence in screen-reading of mammograms, based on retrospective data from 122,969 screening examinations.
Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Frequency and characteristics of errors by artificial intelligence (AI) in reading screening mammography: a systematic review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Pooled it
- Detecting Performance Drift in AI Models for Medical Image Analysis Using CUSUM Chart.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- AI-based triage and decision support in mammography and digital tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening: a paired, noninferiority trial.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Performance Tradeoffs of ChatGPT-5.2 Thinking (OpenAI) Compared with Radiologist Interpretation in Biopsy-Referred Mammography: Cancer Detection, False Positives, and Laterality.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- A novel statistical framework for quantifying risks and benefits of AI automation in screening mammography.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Workload reduction of digital breast tomosynthesis screening using artificial intelligence and synthetic mammography: a simulation study.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- Mammographic classification of interval breast cancers and artificial intelligence performance.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Simulated arbitration of discordance between radiologists and artificial intelligence interpretation of breast cancer screening mammograms.Journal of medical screening · 2025Article
- Current Strategies to Reducing Interval Breast Cancers: A Systematic Review.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2025Review
- Impact of human and artificial intelligence collaboration on workload reduction in medical image interpretation.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Radiologist Burnout.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Article
- AI-integrated Screening to Replace Double Reading of Mammograms: A Population-wide Accuracy and Feasibility Study.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- 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
- Population-wide evaluation of artificial intelligence and radiologist assessment of screening mammograms.European radiology · 2024Article
- Performance of an Artificial Intelligence System for Breast Cancer Detection on Screening Mammograms from BreastScreen Norway.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Senology - Where Do We Stand and What Are the Future Horizons?European journal of breast health · 2024Article
- Breast cancer detection accuracy of AI in an entire screening population: a retrospective, multicentre study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023Article
- To think it, wish it, even want it-but do it! Quality control measures in mammography image interpretation: radiologists' attitudes and preferences vs perceived obstacles and limitations.European radiology · 2023Article
- Automatic correction of performance drift under acquisition shift in medical image classification.Nature communications · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesArtificial intelligence (AI) has shown promising results when used on retrospective data from mammographic screening. However, few studies have explored the possible consequences of different strategies for combining AI and radiologists in screen-reading.
methodsA total of 122,969 digital screening examinations performed between 2009 and 2018 in BreastScreen Norway were retrospectively processed by an AI system, which scored the examinations from 1 to 10; 1 indicated low suspicion of malignancy and 10 high suspicion. Results were merged with information about screening outcome and used to explore consensus, recall, and cancer detection for 11 different scenarios of combining AI and radiologists.
resultsRecall was 3.2%, screen-detected cancer 0.61% and interval cancer 0.17% after independent double reading and served as reference values. In a scenario where examinations with AI scores 1-5 were considered negative and 6-10 resulted in standard independent double reading, the estimated recall was 2.6% and screen-detected cancer 0.60%. When scores 1-9 were considered negative and score 10 double read, recall was 1.2% and screen-detected cancer 0.53%. In these two scenarios, potential rates of screen-detected cancer could be up to 0.63% and 0.56%, if the interval cancers selected for consensus were detected at screening. In the former scenario, screen-reading volume would be reduced by 50%, while the latter would reduce the volume by 90%.
conclusionSeveral theoretical scenarios with AI and radiologists have the potential to reduce the volume in screen-reading without affecting cancer detection substantially. Possible influence on recall and interval cancers must be evaluated in prospective studies. KEY POINTS: • Different scenarios using artificial intelligence in combination with radiologists could reduce the screen-reading volume by 50% and result in a rate of screen-detected cancer ranging from 0.59% to 0.60%, compared to 0.61% after standard independent double reading • The use of artificial intelligence in combination with radiologists has the potential to identify negative screening examinations with high precision in mammographic screening and to reduce the rate of interval cancer.
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.