ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2026
Optimising Radiologist Performance in Cancer Detection on Mammograms: The Impact of Weekly Reading Hours and Test Set Experience on BreastScreen and Non-BreastScreen Readers.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2026. 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
Early detection through mammographic screening plays a central role in improving breast cancer outcomes, with diagnostic accuracy relying heavily on radiologist performance. While experience and case volume are recognised contributors to accuracy, the specific effect of weekly mammogram reading hours (HPW) remains unclear. This study examined the relationship between HPW and diagnostic performance among BreastScreen (BS) radiologists, non-BreastScreen radiologists, and radiology registrars, and explored whether completing multiple BREAST training test sets enhanced diagnostic accuracy. This retrospective observer-performance study analysed digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) readings from 871 test set completions by BreastScreen radiologists, non-BreastScreen radiologists and radiology registrars across 13 BREAST test sets completed between 2014-2024. Performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, lesion sensitivity, ROC AUC, and JAFROC. Demographic and performance data of participants were collected through the BREAST platform. Statistical analyses were performed to assess associations between HPW and diagnostic performance, and to identify performance plateau thresholds across HPW categories. Performance of readers improved consistently with increasing HPW for all cohorts, with significant positive correlations observed for most performance metrics (p<0.05). JAFROC plateau values occurred at different thresholds: 20-30 HPW for BreastScreen radiologists, 10-20 HPW for non-BS radiologists, and 5-10 HPW for registrars. In DBT analyses, BreastScreen radiologists achieved significantly higher JAFROC scores than non-BreastScreen radiologists only within the lowest HPW category (p<0.05). Completing ten or more BREAST test sets was not associated with significant improvements in diagnostic performance. Increasing HPW was associated with improved diagnostic performance up to cohort-specific thresholds, beyond which additional reading yielded limited benefit. Establishing optimal HPW levels may help screening services maintain high diagnostic standards while minimising fatigue and supporting workforce sustainability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42472897What 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.