ArticleRadiology. Artificial intelligence2025
Influence of Mammography Acquisition Parameters on AI and Radiologist Interpretive Performance.
Article in Radiology. Artificial intelligence, 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.
- From Medical Records to AI-Ready Datasets: A Practical Guide for Clinical Researchers.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Development and validation of risk stratification models for hepatocellular cancer: A framework from the translational liver cancer consortium.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the impact of screening mammography acquisition parameters on the interpretive performance of artificial intelligence (AI) and radiologists. Materials and Methods The associations between seven mammogram acquisition parameters-mammography machine version, kilovoltage peak, x-ray exposure delivered, relative x-ray exposure, paddle size, compression force, and breast thickness-and AI and radiologist performance in interpreting two-dimensional screening mammograms acquired by a diverse health system between December 2010 and 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. The top 11 AI models and the ensemble model from the Digital Mammography Dialogue on Reverse Engineering Assessment and Methods (DREAM) Challenge were assessed. The associations between each acquisition parameter and the sensitivity and specificity of the AI models and the radiologists' interpretations were separately evaluated using generalized estimating equations-based models at the examination level, adjusted for several clinical factors. Results The dataset included 28 278 screening two-dimensional mammograms from 22 626 women (mean age ± SD, 58.5 years ± 11.5; 4913 women had multiple mammograms). Of these, 324 examinations resulted in a breast cancer diagnosis within 1 year. The acquisition parameters were significantly associated with the performance of both AI and radiologists, with absolute effect sizes reaching 10% for sensitivity and 5% for specificity; however, the associations differed between AI and radiologists for several parameters. Increased exposure delivered reduced the specificity for the ensemble AI (-4.5% per 1 SD increase;
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.