Optimising Radiologist Performance in Cancer Detection on Mammograms: The Impact of Weekly Reading Hours and Test Set Experience on BreastScreen and Non-BreastScreen Readers.
Jayden Wells, Phuong Dung Yun Trieu, Melissa L Barron, Deborah Stephens, Dania Abu Awwad, Sarah J Lewis
{"title":"Optimising Radiologist Performance in Cancer Detection on Mammograms: The Impact of Weekly Reading Hours and Test Set Experience on BreastScreen and Non-BreastScreen Readers.","authors":"Jayden Wells, Phuong Dung Yun Trieu, Melissa L Barron, Deborah Stephens, Dania Abu Awwad, Sarah J Lewis","doi":"10.1007/s13187-026-02954-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Early detection through mammographic screening plays a central role in improving breast cancer outcomes, with diagnostic accuracy relying heavily on radiologist performance. While experience and case volume are recognised contributors to accuracy, the specific effect of weekly mammogram reading hours (HPW) remains unclear. This study examined the relationship between HPW and diagnostic performance among BreastScreen (BS) radiologists, non-BreastScreen radiologists, and radiology registrars, and explored whether completing multiple BREAST training test sets enhanced diagnostic accuracy. This retrospective observer-performance study analysed digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) readings from 871 test set completions by BreastScreen radiologists, non-BreastScreen radiologists and radiology registrars across 13 BREAST test sets completed between 2014-2024. Performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, lesion sensitivity, ROC AUC, and JAFROC. Demographic and performance data of participants were collected through the BREAST platform. Statistical analyses were performed to assess associations between HPW and diagnostic performance, and to identify performance plateau thresholds across HPW categories. Performance of readers improved consistently with increasing HPW for all cohorts, with significant positive correlations observed for most performance metrics (p<0.05). JAFROC plateau values occurred at different thresholds: 20-30 HPW for BreastScreen radiologists, 10-20 HPW for non-BS radiologists, and 5-10 HPW for registrars. In DBT analyses, BreastScreen radiologists achieved significantly higher JAFROC scores than non-BreastScreen radiologists only within the lowest HPW category (p<0.05). Completing ten or more BREAST test sets was not associated with significant improvements in diagnostic performance. Increasing HPW was associated with improved diagnostic performance up to cohort-specific thresholds, beyond which additional reading yielded limited benefit. Establishing optimal HPW levels may help screening services maintain high diagnostic standards while minimising fatigue and supporting workforce sustainability.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-026-02954-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Early detection through mammographic screening plays a central role in improving breast cancer outcomes, with diagnostic accuracy relying heavily on radiologist performance. While experience and case volume are recognised contributors to accuracy, the specific effect of weekly mammogram reading hours (HPW) remains unclear. This study examined the relationship between HPW and diagnostic performance among BreastScreen (BS) radiologists, non-BreastScreen radiologists, and radiology registrars, and explored whether completing multiple BREAST training test sets enhanced diagnostic accuracy. This retrospective observer-performance study analysed digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) readings from 871 test set completions by BreastScreen radiologists, non-BreastScreen radiologists and radiology registrars across 13 BREAST test sets completed between 2014-2024. Performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, lesion sensitivity, ROC AUC, and JAFROC. Demographic and performance data of participants were collected through the BREAST platform. Statistical analyses were performed to assess associations between HPW and diagnostic performance, and to identify performance plateau thresholds across HPW categories. Performance of readers improved consistently with increasing HPW for all cohorts, with significant positive correlations observed for most performance metrics (p<0.05). JAFROC plateau values occurred at different thresholds: 20-30 HPW for BreastScreen radiologists, 10-20 HPW for non-BS radiologists, and 5-10 HPW for registrars. In DBT analyses, BreastScreen radiologists achieved significantly higher JAFROC scores than non-BreastScreen radiologists only within the lowest HPW category (p<0.05). Completing ten or more BREAST test sets was not associated with significant improvements in diagnostic performance. Increasing HPW was associated with improved diagnostic performance up to cohort-specific thresholds, beyond which additional reading yielded limited benefit. Establishing optimal HPW levels may help screening services maintain high diagnostic standards while minimising fatigue and supporting workforce sustainability.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues.
Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care.
We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts.
Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited.
Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants.
Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.