Evaluates AI's performance in cancer detection during digital mammography screening, indicating effectiveness compared to radiologists.
= .13), with 82.2% (95% CI: 77.0%, 86.4%) of all cancer cases scored 10 (screening-detected: 88.7%; 95% CI: 83.9%, 92.3% vs interval cancers: 41.7%; 95% CI: 27.1%, 57.8%). The positive predictive value was 8.9% (95% CI: 7.8%, 10.1%). Conclusion The performance of the AI model was comparable to that of double reading by radiologists. Although prior examinations provided limited additional benefit, they offered slightly improved specificities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moshina et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: