Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2012 Jul 24:12:22.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2342-12-22.

Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review

Edward Azavedo  1 , Sophia Zackrisson, Ingegerd Mejàre, Marianne Heibert Arnlind
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review

Edward Azavedo et al. BMC Med Imaging. .

Abstract

Background: In accordance with European guidelines, mammography screening comprises independent readings by two breast radiologists (double reading). CAD (computer-aided detection) has been suggested to complement or replace one of the two readers (single reading + CAD).The aim of this systematic review is to address the following question: Is the reading of mammographic x-ray images by a single breast radiologist together with CAD at least as accurate as double reading?

Methods: The electronic literature search included the databases Pub Med, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers assessed abstracts and full-text articles.

Results: 1049 abstracts were identified, of which 996 were excluded with reference to inclusion and exclusion criteria; 53 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Finally, four articles were included in the qualitative analysis, and one in a GRADE synthesis.

Conclusions: The scientific evidence is insufficient to determine whether the accuracy of single reading + CAD is at least equivalent to that obtained in standard practice, i.e. double reading where two breast radiologists independently read the mammographic images.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure1a shows a rather hard to detect breast cancer in the left breast (arrow); the right breast is normal. Figure 1b shows an easily detected cancer in the right breast (arrow); the left breast is normal.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow chart of the search strategy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, Baldetorp L, Holmberg LH, Grontoft O, Ljungquist U, Lundstrom B, Manson JC, Eklund G. et al.Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet. 1985;1(8433):829–832. - PubMed
    1. Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, Landberg T, Lindholm K, Linell F, Ljungberg O, Ranstam J, Sigfusson B. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmo mammographic screening trial. BMJ. 1988;297(6654):943–948. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bjurstam N, Bjorneld L, Duffy SW, Smith TC, Cahlin E, Eriksson O, Hafstrom LO, Lingaas H, Mattsson J, Persson S. et al.The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence, and mode of detection for women ages 39–49 years at randomization. Cancer. 1997;80(11):2091–2099. - PubMed
    1. Frisell J, Glas U, Hellstrom L, Somell A. Randomized mammographic screening for breast cancer in Stockholm. Design, first round results and comparisons. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1986;8(1):45–54. - PubMed
    1. Vainio H, Bianchini F. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention- Breast Cancer Screening. IARCPress, Lyon, France; 2002. p. 2002.

MeSH terms