Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Influence of AI Decision Support on Radiologists’ Performance and Visual Search in Screening Mammography
8
Zitationen
12
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) decision support may improve radiologist performance during screening mammography interpretation, but its effect on radiologists' visual search behavior remains unclear. Purpose To compare radiologist performance and visual search patterns when reading screening mammograms with and without an AI decision support system. Materials and Methods In this retrospective multireader multicase study, 12 breast screening radiologists with 4-32 years of experience (median, 12 years) from 10 institutions evaluated screening mammograms acquired between September 2016 and May 2019. Assessments were conducted unaided and with a Food and Drug Administration-approved, European Commission-marked AI decision support system, which assigns a region suspicion score from 1 to 100, with 100 indicating the highest malignancy likelihood. An eye tracker monitored readers' eye movements. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity between unaided and AI-assisted reading were compared using multireader multicase analysis software. Reading times, breast fixation coverage (percentage breast covered by fixations within 2.5° visual angle radius), fixation time, and time to first fixation within the lesion region were compared using bootstrap resampling (<i>n</i> = 20 000). Results Mammography examinations (75 with breast cancer, 75 without breast cancer) from 150 women (median age, 55 years [IQR, 50-63 years]; age range, 49-72 years) were read. The mean AUC was higher with AI support versus unaided reading (unaided, 0.93 [95% CI: 0.91, 0.96]; AI-supported, 0.97 [95% CI: 0.95, 0.98]; <i>P</i> < .001). There was no evidence of a difference in mean sensitivity (81.7% [735 of 900 readings] vs 87.2% [785 of 900]; <i>P</i> = .06), specificity (89.0% [801 of 900] vs 91.1% [820 of 900]; <i>P</i> = .46), or reading time (29.4 vs 30.8 seconds; <i>P</i> = .33). Breast fixation coverage was lower with AI support (11.1% vs 9.5% of breast area; <i>P</i> = .004), while fixation time in the lesion region was higher (4.4 vs 5.4 seconds; <i>P</i> = .006). There was no evidence of a difference in time to first fixation within the lesion region (3.4 vs 3.8 seconds; <i>P</i> = .13). Conclusion Radiologists improved their breast cancer detection accuracy when reading mammography with AI support, spending more fixation time on suspicious areas and less on the rest of the breast, indicating a more efficient search. © RSNA, 2025 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> See also the editorial by Wolfe in this issue.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.231 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.084 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.444 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.423 Zit.
Autoren
Institutionen
- Radboud University Nijmegen(NL)
- University Medical Center(US)
- Radboud University Medical Center(NL)
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers(NL)
- Haga Hospital(NL)
- Gelre Hospitals(NL)
- Maastricht University Medical Centre(NL)
- Maastricht University(NL)
- Diakonessenhuis hospital(NL)
- Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis(NL)
- University of California, Santa Barbara(US)
- Dutch Expert Centre for Screening(NL)
- University of Twente(NL)