ArticleDigital health
Engaging with artificial intelligence in mammography screening: Swedish breast radiologists' views on trust, information and expertise.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for risk-stratified breast cancer screening: a systematic review of evidence, clinical integration, and ethical implications in risk assessment tools.La Radiologia medica · 2026Pooled it
- Factors influencing AI acceptance in radiology: a systematic review across the radiology workflow.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Implementation of an artificial intelligence-based system for mammography in the compulsory medical insurance program: results of a 3-year study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Assessing the robustness of AI lesion risk scores at different exposure settings using an anthropomorphic breast phantom.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2026Article
- Between map and maze: reframing trust in healthcare AI.AI & society · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence and breast cancer screening in Serbia: a dual-perspective qualitative study among radiologists and screening-aged women.Frontiers in radiology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Driven Personalization in Breast Cancer Screening: From Population Models to Individualized Protocols.Cancers · 2025Review
- Attitudes, Perceptions, and Factors Influencing the Adoption of AI in Health Care Among Medical Staff: Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Influences on trust in the use of AI-based triage-an interview study with primary healthcare professionals and patients in Sweden.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Lack of trust and transparency is stressed as a challenge for clinical implementation of artificial intelligence (AI). In breast cancer screening, AI-supported reading shows promising results but more research is needed on how medical experts, which are facing the integration of AI into their work, reason about trust and information needs. From a sociotechnical information practice perspective, we add to this knowledge by a Swedish case study. This study aims to: (1) clarify Swedish breast radiologists' views on trust, information and expertise pertaining to AI in mammography screening and (2) analytically address ideas about medical professionals' critical engagement with AI and motivations for trust in AI. Method: An online survey was distributed to Swedish breast radiologists. Survey responses were analysed by descriptive statistical method, correlation analysis and qualitative content analysis. The results were used as foundation for analysing trust and information as parts of critical engagements with AI. Results: Of the Swedish breast radiologists ( Conclusions: There is a demand for enhanced information, explainability and transparency of AI-supported mammography. Further discussion and agreement are needed considering what the desired goals for trust in AI should be and how it relates to medical professionals' critical evaluation of AI-made claims in medical decision support.
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.