Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39134745›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2025

Simulation training in mammography with AI-generated images: a multireader study.

Krithika Rangarajan, Veeramakali Vignesh Manivannan, Harpinder Singh, Amit Gupta, Hrithik Maheshwari, Rishparn Gogoi, Debashish Gogoi, Rupam Jyoti Das, Smriti Hari, Surabhi Vyas and 6 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

16 authors.

Krithika Rangarajan *AIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India. krithikarangarajan86@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5376-6390
Veeramakali Vignesh Manivannan *IIT Delhi, Delhi, India.
Harpinder SinghAIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Amit GuptaAIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Hrithik MaheshwariIIT Delhi, Delhi, India.
Rishparn GogoiIIT Delhi, Delhi, India.
Debashish GogoiIIT Delhi, Delhi, India.
Rupam Jyoti DasIIT Delhi, Delhi, India.
Smriti HariAIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Surabhi VyasAIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Raju SharmaAIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Shivam PandeyAIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India.
V SeenuAIIMS New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Subhashis BanerjeeIIT Delhi, Delhi, India.
Vinay NamboodiriIIT Kanpur, Kanpur, India.
Chetan AroraIIT Delhi, Delhi, India.

Funding

Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India BT/PR33193/AI/133/5/2019
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe interpretation of mammograms requires many years of training and experience. Currently, training in mammography, like the rest of diagnostic radiology, is through institutional libraries, books, and experience accumulated over time. We explore whether artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated images can help in simulation education and result in measurable improvement in performance of residents in training.

methodsWe developed a generative adversarial network (GAN) that was capable of generating mammography images with varying characteristics, such as size and density, and created a tool with which a user could control these characteristics. The tool allowed the user (a radiology resident) to realistically insert cancers within different regions of the mammogram. We then provided this tool to residents in training. Residents were randomized into a practice group and a non-practice group, and the difference in performance before and after practice with such a tool (in comparison to no intervention in the non-practice group) was assessed.

resultsFifty residents participated in the study, 27 underwent simulation training, and 23 did not. There was a significant improvement in the sensitivity (7.43 percent, significant at p-value = 0.03), negative predictive value (5.05 percent, significant at p-value = 0.008) and accuracy (6.49 percent, significant at p-value = 0.01) among residents in the detection of cancer on mammograms after simulation training.

conclusionOur study shows the value of simulation training in diagnostic radiology and explores the potential of generative AI to enable such simulation training. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Using generative artificial intelligence, simulation training modules can be developed that can help residents in training by providing them with a visual impression of a variety of different cases. KEY POINTS: Generative networks can produce diagnostic imaging with specific characteristics, potentially useful for training residents. Training with generating images improved residents' mammographic diagnostic abilities. Development of a game-like interface that exploits these networks can result in improvement in performance over a short training period.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsGenerative Adversarial NetworksMammographySimulation TrainingArtificial IntelligenceClinical CompetenceFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyRadiologyArtificial intelligenceBreast cancerMammographySimulation training

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.