Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 9, 2026

Detection of Architectural Distortion in Prior Mammograms via Analysis of Oriented Patterns
Published on: August 30, 2013
AI-supported approaches for mammography single and double reading: A controlled multireader study
Beniamino Brancato1, Veronica Magni2, Calogero Saieva3
1Unit of Breast Imaging, Istituto per lo Studio, la Prevenzione e la Rete Oncologica (ISPRO), Florence, Italy.
Purpose:
To assess the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on the diagnostic performance of radiologists with varying experience levels in mammography reading, considering single and simulated double reading approaches.
Methods:
In this retrospective study, 150 mammography examinations (30 with pathology-confirmed malignancies, 120 without malignancies [confirmed by 2-year follow-up]) were reviewed according to five approaches: A) human single reading by 26 radiologists of varying experience; B) AI single reading (Lunit INSIGHT MMG; C) human single reading with simultaneous AI support; D) simulated human-human double reading; E) simulated human-AI double reading, with AI as second independent reader flagging cases with a cancer probability ≥10 %. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated and compared using McNemar's test, univariate and multivariable logistic regression.
Results:
Compared to single reading without AI support, single reading with simultaneous AI support improved mean sensitivity from 69.2 % (standard deviation [SD] 15.6) to 84.5 % (SD 8.1, p < 0.001), providing comparable mean specificity (91.8 % versus 90.8 %, p = 0.06). The sensitivity increase provided by the AI-supported single reading was largest in the group of radiologists with a sensitivity below the median in the non-supported single reading, from 56.7 % (SD 12.1) to 79.7 % (SD 10.2, p < 0.001). In the simulated human-AI double reading approach, sensitivity further increased to 91.8 % (SD 3.4), surpassing that of the human-human simulated double reading (87.4 %, SD 8.8, p = 0.016), with comparable mean specificity (from 84.0 % to 83.0 %, p = 0.17).
Conclusion:
AI support significantly enhanced sensitivity across all reading approaches, particularly benefiting worse performing radiologists. In the simulated double reading approaches, AI incorporation as independent second reader significantly increased sensitivity without compromising specificity.

