ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Patient perceptions and attitudes towards the use of artificial intelligence in the symptomatic breast unit.
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.
- Patient and Public Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Imaging and Clinical Decision-Making: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesArtificial intelligence (AI) has been applied in a number of breast screening settings with favourable results. While there are a limited number of studies exploring patient attitudes on the use of AI in breast screening, none to date have examined patient perceptions on the use of AI in the symptomatic setting. MATERIALS AND
methodsFollowing institutional approval, anonymous questionnaires were given to all patients attending the symptomatic breast clinic imaging department from 08/07/2024 to 04/10/2024. The questionnaire included questions on participant demographics and opinion questions on the use of AI in breast imaging. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to examine the associations between sociodemographic characteristics and patients' views about AI use in breast imaging.
resultsOne thousand five hundred thirty-four participants completed the questionnaire. Most participants were aged 40-59 years(35.8%). Almost one-quarter had either a personal (n = 372) or family history of breast cancer (n = 367). 61.4% (n = 943) had some/strong interest in AI. 46.3% (n = 711) agreed the use of AI in healthcare was a good idea, and 43.9% (n = 673) were indifferent. 61% (n = 935) agreed to a radiologist and AI tool reading their mammogram, and 66.9% (n = 1026) disagreed with AI being the sole reader of their mammogram. Even if AI was shown to be more accurate, 66.1% of patients still prefer a radiologist to review their mammogram, and even if AI was shown to be more efficient, 75.4% prefer a radiologist.
conclusionParticipants generally held favourable views towards the use of AI in healthcare. They welcome the use of AI as an adjunct for radiologists, but disagree with AI being the only reader of their mammogram. KEY POINTS: Question Previous studies have explored patient attitudes on the use of AI in breast screening, but none to date have assessed this in the symptomatic setting. Findings The majority of participants welcome the use of AI as an adjunct for radiologists but disagree with AI being the sole reader of their mammogram. Clinical relevance This study highlights the importance of patient education to illustrate the benefits and limitations of AI in healthcare and how AI might work in the symptomatic breast setting.
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.