ArticleFrontiers in big data2025
Implementation of a net benefit parameter in ROC curve decision thresholds for AI-powered mammography screening.
Article in Frontiers in big data, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into mammography necessitates robust quality control methods. The lack of standardized methods for establishing decision thresholds on the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves makes it challenging to judge the AI performance. This study aims to develop a method for determining the decision threshold for AI in screening mammography to ensure the widest possible population of women with a breast pathology is diagnosed. Methods: Three AI models were retrospectively evaluated using a dataset of digital mammograms. The dataset consisted of screening mammography examinations obtained from 663,606 patients over the age of 40. Our method estimates the decision threshold using a novel approach to net benefit (NB) analysis. Our approach to setting the cutoff threshold was compared with the threshold determined by Youden's index using McNemar's test. Results: Replacing the Youden index with our method across three AI models, resulted in a threefold reduction in false-positive rates, twofold reduction in false-negative rates, and twofold increase in true-positive rates. Thus, the sensitivity at the cutoff threshold determined by NB increased to 99% (maximum) compared to the sensitivity determined by Youden's index threshold (72% maximum). Correspondingly, the specificity when using our method decreased to 48% (minimum), compared to 75% (minimum) with the Youden's index method. Conclusions: We propose using AI as the initial reader together with our novel method for determining the decision threshold in screening with double reading. This approach enhances the AI sensitivity and improves timely breast cancer diagnosis.
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.