Back to claim
SourceThe cases citing it, and what each argues, are listed below.

Artificial intelligence for breast cancer detection in screening mammography in Sweden: a prospective, population-based, paired-reader, non-inferiority study

Redirecting6 Oct 2026
Source type
Academic Paper
Published
6 Oct 2026
Added by
IKECHUKWUKoinovera team
Added
6 Oct 2026

Contributor evidence

What this source establishes

The study claims that AI can perform mammography screening at least as effectively as a second radiologist in detecting breast cancer. This is because one radiologist supported by AI detected 261 cancers compared with 250 detected by two radiologists, producing a 4% higher non-inferior cancer detection rate.

Limitations

One site and one AI product; part-funded by the product's maker.

Supporting excerpt

Findings From April 1, 2021, to June 9, 2022, 58 344 women aged 40–74 years underwent regular mammography screening, of whom 55 581 were included in the study. 269 (0·5%) women were diagnosed with screen-detected breast cancer based on an initial positive read: double reading by one radiologist plus AI was non-inferior for cancer detection compared with double reading by two radiologists (261 [0·5%] vs 250 [0·4%] detected cases; relative proportion 1·04 [95% CI 1·00–1·09]). Single reading by AI (246 [0·4%] vs 250 [0·4%] detected cases; relative proportion 0·98 [0·93–1·04]) and triple reading by two radiologists plus AI (269 [0·5%] vs 250 [0·4%] detected cases; relative proportion 1·08 [1·04–1·11]) were also non-inferior to double reading by two radiologists.

AI evidence analysis

Koinovera can compare extracted source evidence against this claim. The result is advisory and may be wrong.

Koinovera could not read this source.

We couldn't reliably identify the article content.

AI analysis can use the excerpt the contributor provided instead.

Sign in to analyse evidence

How readers rated this source

These rate the source itself, wherever it is cited. The reasoning built on it is rated on each case.

No one has rated this source yet.

Sign in to rate this source
Open source

Share source

Anyone with the link can read this page. They do not need an account.

Cited in

A source does not take a side by itself. These are the cases that use it, and what each argues.

Loading the cases that cite this source…

Review notes

Short, specific corrections about this source itself. They show wherever the source is cited.

Sign in to add note

Loading review notes…

Gathering the latest community-submitted evidence.