Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41911478›Full record

ReviewJMIR medical informatics2026

Viewpoint on the Consequences and Mitigation of Cognitive Bias in the Radiological Interpretation of Breast Cancer Imaging Using Artificial Intelligence.

Lorenzo Conti, Benedetta Capetti, Ottavia Battaglia, Roberto Grasso, Filippo Pesapane, Dario Monzani, Gabriella Pravettoni

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lorenzo ContiApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Ripamonti 435, Milan, 20141, Italy, +39 0294371083.ORCID 0000-0002-7658-0991
Benedetta CapettiApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Ripamonti 435, Milan, 20141, Italy, +39 0294371083.ORCID 0000-0003-2050-9587
Ottavia BattagliaDepartment of Oncology and Haemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6241-4709
Roberto GrassoApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Ripamonti 435, Milan, 20141, Italy, +39 0294371083.ORCID 0000-0002-9699-9626
Filippo PesapaneBreast Imaging Division, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0374-5054
Dario MonzaniApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Ripamonti 435, Milan, 20141, Italy, +39 0294371083.ORCID 0000-0001-9544-2933
Gabriella PravettoniApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Via Ripamonti 435, Milan, 20141, Italy, +39 0294371083.ORCID 0000-0002-4843-4663

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlabelled: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into breast imaging workflows, offering the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and early cancer detection. Image interpretation plays a pivotal role in the breast cancer diagnostic pathway, directly influencing therapeutic decisions and patient outcomes. However, the effective implementation of AI-assisted systems relies not only on technical performance but also on radiologists' trust, acceptance, and readiness to incorporate these tools into clinical practice. In addition, system-related, perceptual, and cognitive factors may contribute to diagnostic errors, ultimately affecting overall accuracy and reliability. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the cognitive and systemic sources of diagnostic inaccuracies in breast imaging, emphasizing the growing role of AI as both a supportive and potentially bias-modulating tool. Recent prospective studies have demonstrated the clinical safety and effectiveness of AI-assisted mammography screening, reporting improved cancer detection rates and reduced workload. Nonetheless, the integration of AI into diagnostic workflows without an appropriate knowledge of the consequences may introduce new cognitive biases, such as anchoring, automation, and confirmation bias, that influence radiologists' decision-making and counteract the intended benefits. To address these challenges, the paper outlines strategies to mitigate diagnostic errors and foster appropriate integration of AI into clinical practice. These include targeted training programs, enhanced interdisciplinary communication, and standardized interpretation workflows that promote consistent evidence-based practice. Furthermore, the adoption of explainable AI approaches is identified as a key factor in improving model transparency and interpretability, allowing radiologists to understand algorithmic reasoning and engage in a more informed, confidence-based human-AI collaboration. Ultimately, a balanced and context-sensitive integration of AI, grounded in continuous professional education and cognitive awareness, is essential for improving diagnostic accuracy while preserving radiologists' critical analytical skills.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBreast NeoplasmsCognitionMammographyBiasDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleHumansIntelligent SystemsRadiologistsAIartificial intelligencebreast cancercognitive biasimagingradiological assessment

Identifiers

PMID41911478
PMCPMC13035202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.