Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Artificial intelligence (AI) readers of mammograms compare favourably to individual radiologists in detecting breast cancer. However, AI readers cannot perform at the level of multi-reader systems used by screening programs in countries such as Australia, Sweden, and the UK. Therefore, implementation demands human-AI collaboration. Here, we use a large, high-quality retrospective mammography dataset from Victoria, Australia to conduct detailed simulations of five potential AI-integrated screening pathways, and examine human-AI interaction effects to explore automation bias. Operating an AI reader as a second reader or as a high confidence filter improves current screening outcomes by 1.9-2.5% in sensitivity and up to 0.6% in specificity, achieving 4.6-10.9% reduction in assessments and 48-80.7% reduction in human reads. Automation bias degrades performance in multi-reader settings but improves it for single-readers. This study provides insight into feasible approaches for AI-integrated screening pathways and prospective studies necessary prior to clinical adoption.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Helen Frazer
Carlos A. Peña‐Solórzano
Chun Fung Kwok
Nature Communications
The University of Melbourne
The University of Adelaide
St Vincent's Hospital
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Frazer et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/68e5a2bab6db64358753d02b — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51725-8
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: