Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) programs in radiology typically provide a numeric score for each case that correlates with the underlying pathology. However, these scores are not readily interpretable by themselves. To address this, we propose improving score interpretability by providing the False Discovery Rate (FDR) and False Omission Rate (FOR) corresponding with each score threshold. Using an open-source AI program for breast cancer, we estimated FDR and FOR across a range of AI scores using data from 130,712 digital screening mammograms, of which 907 were positive and 129,805 were negative. FDR and FOR ranged from 99.27% and 0.03%, respectively, at the low end of the score distribution to 60.98% and 0.65%, respectively, at the high end of the distribution. Providing these error rates alongside AI scores allows clinicians to consider the balance of trade-offs between false positive and false negative interpretations.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Adam Yala is supported by the E.P. Evans Foundation and Breast Cancer Research Foundation awards. Maggie Chung is supported by the Radiological Society of North America Research Scholar Grant. Funders did not directly influence or partake in this study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
University of California, San Francisco Institutional Review Board gave ethical approval for this work
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data generated or analyzed during the study are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.
