Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

User-Friendly Summary of BI-RADS v2025: What Practicing Radiologists Want to Know.

AJR. American journal of roentgenology·2026
Same author

Dynamic breast MRI with Flexible Temporal Resolution Aided by Deep Learning.

Nature communications·2026
Same author

Assessing the Effectiveness of the <i>Radiology</i> In Training Program in Fostering Highly Skilled Reviewers.

Radiology·2026
Same author

Reporting checklist for foundation and large language models in medical research (REFINE): an international consensus guideline.

Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)·2026
Same author

Guidelines for Reporting Studies on Large Language Models in Radiology: An International Delphi Expert Survey.

Radiology·2026
Same author

Breast US: State of the Art.

Radiology·2026
Same journal

Visibility patterns of architectural distortion on synthesized 2D vs. digital breast tomosynthesis and their diagnostic implications.

Clinical imaging·2026
Same journal

Diagnostic performance of CT-based node-RADS for detecting metastatic lymph nodes in melanoma and comparison with short-axis and roundness index.

Clinical imaging·2026
Same journal

Identifying hepatocellular carcinoma patients at risk of early non-response after first-cycle transarterial chemoembolization: A reproducible machine learning study.

Clinical imaging·2026
Same journal

Comment on "The importance of FDG avidity in incidental thyroid nodules on FDG PET/CT".

Clinical imaging·2026
Same journal

Lipiodol in embolization therapy: Evolution from a diagnostic to a therapeutic agent.

Clinical imaging·2026
Same journal

Musculoskeletal abnormalities: A clue to systemic diseases.

Clinical imaging·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 24, 2025

Integrating Augmented Reality Tools in Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema Prognostication and Diagnosis
06:03

Integrating Augmented Reality Tools in Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema Prognostication and Diagnosis

Published on: February 6, 2020

6.7K

PACS-integrated machine learning breast density classifier: clinical validation.

John Lewin1, Sven Schoenherr2, Martin Seebass2

  • 1Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States of America.

Clinical Imaging
|July 8, 2023
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

A new artificial intelligence tool accurately assesses breast density, showing high agreement with radiologists. This machine learning model predicts Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density categories, aiding in mammographic analysis.

Keywords:
Artificial intelligenceBreast densityMammography

More Related Videos

Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model
07:15

Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model

Published on: August 16, 2020

6.9K
Predicting Treatment Response to Image-Guided Therapies Using Machine Learning: An Example for Trans-Arterial Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma
04:09

Predicting Treatment Response to Image-Guided Therapies Using Machine Learning: An Example for Trans-Arterial Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Published on: October 10, 2018

8.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 24, 2025

Integrating Augmented Reality Tools in Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema Prognostication and Diagnosis
06:03

Integrating Augmented Reality Tools in Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema Prognostication and Diagnosis

Published on: February 6, 2020

6.7K
Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model
07:15

Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model

Published on: August 16, 2020

6.9K
Predicting Treatment Response to Image-Guided Therapies Using Machine Learning: An Example for Trans-Arterial Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma
04:09

Predicting Treatment Response to Image-Guided Therapies Using Machine Learning: An Example for Trans-Arterial Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Published on: October 10, 2018

8.3K

Area of Science:

  • Radiology and Medical Imaging
  • Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Machine Learning Applications

Background:

  • Accurate breast density assessment is crucial for mammography interpretation and breast cancer risk stratification.
  • Current methods rely on subjective radiologist interpretation, leading to inter-observer variability.
  • Novel AI tools offer potential for objective and consistent breast density classification.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the performance of a novel machine learning-based tool for predicting Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density.
  • To assess the accuracy of the AI tool against radiologist consensus in diverse clinical settings.

Main Methods:

  • A convolutional neural network was trained on 33,000 mammographic examinations from one academic medical center (Site A).
  • The AI tool's performance was validated on separate datasets of 500 studies from Site A and 700 studies from a second academic medical center (Site B).
  • Radiologist consensus served as the ground truth for performance evaluation at both sites.

Main Results:

  • The AI classifier achieved an accuracy of 84.6% (Site A) and 89.7% (Site B) for four-category BI-RADS density classification.
  • For binary classification (dense vs. non-dense), accuracies were 94.4% (Site A) and 97.4% (Site B).
  • The AI classifier never disagreed with the consensus reading by more than one density category.

Conclusions:

  • The automated breast density tool demonstrates high agreement with expert radiologists' assessments.
  • This AI-powered tool shows significant potential for improving the consistency and accuracy of breast density evaluations in mammography.