ArticleRadiology. Artificial intelligence2025
Evaluating the Impact of Changes in Artificial Intelligence-derived Case Scores over Time on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Outcomes.
Article in Radiology. Artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the change in digital breast tomosynthesis artificial intelligence (DBT-AI) case scores over sequential screenings. Materials and Methods This retrospective review included 21 108 female patients (mean age ± SD, 58.1 years ± 11.5) with 31 741 DBT screening examinations performed at a single site from February 3, 2020, to September 12, 2022. Among 7000 patients with two or more DBT-AI screenings, 1799 had a 1-year follow-up and were included in the analysis. DBT-AI case scores and differences in case score over time were determined. Case scores ranged from 0 to 100. For each screening outcome (true positive [TP], false positive [FP], true negative [TN], false negative [FN]), mean and median case score change was calculated. Results The highest average case score was seen in TP examinations (average, 75; range, 7-100;
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.