ArticleEuropean radiology2026
How much radiologist time can be saved by implementing AI in screen-reading mammograms?
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reading time in AI-assisted mammography: no measurable time penalty.European radiology · 2026Article
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
objectiveThere is a lack of breast radiologists in Norway and in Europe. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers an alternative to solely human readers and has demonstrated promising results in cancer detection in mammographic screening. We aimed to estimate the potential reduction in radiologists' workload by replacing one of the two radiologists with AI in screen-reading mammograms in BreastScreen Norway. MATERIALS AND
methodsBreastScreen Norway targets about 680,000 women aged 50-69 who are invited biennially. The participation rates for each screening round are about 75%. All the screening mammograms are independently read by two radiologists. We collected information about the number of radiologist positions from all 16 breast centers in the country in 2024, while the number of screening examinations performed and the time spent on screen-reading and consensus were extracted from the screening database. We used 1 min for each screen-reading to estimate the screen-reading workload performed by the radiologists and calculated the time saved if one reader were replaced by AI.
resultsScreen-reading required a total of 6.5 man-years in BreastScreen Norway. Implementing AI as one of the two readers is thus able to reduce the screen-reading workload by 50%, from 6.5 to 3.3 man-years. The workload reduction corresponds to a reduction from 9% to 4.5% of the total workload for radiologists at the Norwegian breast centers.
conclusionImplementation of AI in mammographic screening has the potential to reduce the screen-reading workload for breast radiologists. The reduced screening volume is of moderate influence on the overall workload for breast radiologists. KEY POINTS: Question How much radiology time is expected to be saved if AI were used as one of the two readers of screening mammograms? Findings Use of AI as one of the two readers, reducing the screen reading volume by 50%, was of moderate influence on the total workload for breast radiologists. Clinical relevance Implementing AI was shown to have limited potential in saving radiologists' time in screen-reading mammograms. The main benefit of implementing AI in screen-reading might thus be related to increased sensitivity of the screening test.
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.