ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Value of deep learning model for predicting Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 and 4A lesions on mammography.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning-Based Classification of BI-RADS 4 and BI-RADS 5 Microcalcifications in Mammography Combined with DCE-MRI for Malignant-Benign Discrimination.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Stratifying Breast Lesion Risk Using BI-RADS: A Correlative Study of Imaging and Histopathology.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The diagnostic categorization of a lesion as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 3 or 4A determines whether a patient needs a biopsy; however, interobserver variability exists among radiologists in mammographic interpretation. This variability may lead to underdiagnoses of BI-RADS 3 lesions and unnecessary biopsies of benign BI-RADS 4A lesions. Therefore, we assessed the diagnostic value of a mammography-based deep learning (DL) model for differentiating BI-RADS 3 and 4A lesions and its impact on radiologists' decision-making. Methods: This retrospective multicenter study analyzed 846 mammographically detected breast lesions (BI-RADS 3 and 4A) from 824 patients at Shenzhen People's Hospital and Shenzhen Luohu People's Hospital between January and December 2020. Six breast imaging specialists (three junior and three senior) independently reviewed all mammograms with and without DL model assistance. The follow-up or biopsy results were used as the reference standard. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the area under the curve (AUC), with the DeLong test being used to compare AUCs. Results: The DL model yielded an AUC of 0.74 for distinguishing BI-RADS 3 and 4A lesions, outperforming junior radiologists' standalone performance (AUC =0.57, AUC =0.55, and AUC =0.58) but remaining inferior to senior radiologists (AUC =0.78, AUC =0.77, and AUC =0.76). With DL model assistance, all six radiologists had higher AUCs for diagnosing BI-RADS 3 and 4A lesions as compared to their unassisted performance. Importantly, DL integration significantly increased junior radiologists' AUCs to 0.74-0.77 (P<0.001), whereas the increase in the AUCs of the senior radiologists (to 0.79, 0.78, and 0.78) was not significant (P>0.05). Conclusions: The mammography-based DL model significantly improved the diagnostic performance of junior radiologists for BI-RADS 3 and 4A lesions, effectively reducing missed diagnoses and unnecessary biopsies.
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.