↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Imaging, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review
Published in
BMC Medical Imaging, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2342-12-22
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward Azavedo, Sophia Zackrisson, Ingegerd Mejàre, Marianne Heibert Arnlind

Abstract

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?

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 3%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 73 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Other 8 11%
Researcher 7 9%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 36%
Computer Science 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Engineering 5 7%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 22 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#4,762,914
of 17,349,416 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Imaging
#57
of 424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,751
of 133,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Imaging
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,349,416 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 424 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 133,835 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them