ArticleNature medicine2026
AI-based triage and decision support in mammography and digital tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening: a paired, noninferiority trial.
Article in Nature medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of AI-Assisted Reading Compared With Standard Radiology Interpretation for Malignant Hepatic Lesions on Contrast-Enhanced CT: Diagnostic, Clinical and Workflow Outcomes
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence-based multimodal integration of ultrasound and digital breast tomosynthesis for breast-level risk classification.Precision clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Uncertainty quantification for artificial intelligence in medical imaging: what every radiologist needs to know.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- AI-based Triage in Breast Cancer Screening Reduces Workload with Noninferior Cancer Detection but Higher Recall.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have been demonstrated to improve the accuracy of screening mammograms. Here this prospective, paired, noninferiority clinical trial evaluated whether AI could safely reduce workload by excluding low-risk exams from radiologist reading. Between March 2022 and January 2024, 31,301 women were included in the trial and underwent routine mammograms. Two reading strategies were applied in parallel: standard double-blind reading and partially autonomous AI-supported screening, where cases classified by AI as low risk were assessed as normal and the rest were double read with AI support. The primary outcomes were radiologist workload, cancer detection rate and recall rate. In the AI strategy, radiologist workload was 63.6% lower; the cancer detection rate was 15.2% higher (95% confidence interval 6.6%, 24.4%), increasing from 6.3 of 1,000 to 7.3 of 1,000, P < 0.001; and the recall rate was not noninferior and was 14.8% higher (95% confidence interval 9.0%, 20.6%). Subanalyses by modality highlighted a similar workload reduction in digital mammography (-62.1%) and digital breast tomosynthesis (-65.5%). However, in digital mammography, the cancer detection rate increased by 1.6 of 1,000 and the recall rate by 1.3%, while both remained stable in digital breast tomosynthesis. These results demonstrate the feasibility of a partially automated AI workflow in breast cancer screening, avoiding human reading of studies classified as low risk. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04849776 .
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.