See something, say something: the coroner's perspective.

The communicating safely policy, publicised by the catchphrase See Something, Say Something was released by the Medical Radiation Practice Board of Australia in 2019. It was developed to support medical radiation practitioners (MRPs) upholding the obligation to communicate urgent or unexpected findings in a timely manner, when identified on medical images. Prior to this policy being part of the professional capabilities, several untimely deaths occurred-the majority of whose causal factors could have been mitigated if imaging findings were urgently communicated by MRPs. This commentary summarises three coronial inquests that involved MRPs, discusses how these coronial findings are reflected in the communicating safely policy and provides some recommendations for the profession to ensure this policy is enacted in clinical practice.

Variations of image interpretations of radiologists from different populations in mammography and tomosynthesis with different levels of breast density.

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the diagnostic performances of Australian and Shanghai-based Chinese radiologists in reading full-field digital mammogram (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with different levels of breast density. Approach: Eighty-two Australian radiologists interpreted a 60-case FFDM set, and 29 radiologists also reported a 35-case DBT set. Sixty Shanghai radiologists read the same FFDM set, and 32 radiologists read the DBT set. The diagnostic performances of Australian and Shanghai radiologists were assessed using truth data (cancer cases were biopsy proven) and compared overall in specificity, case sensitivity, lesion sensitivity, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) area under the curve, and jack-knife free-response receiver operating characteristics (JAFROC) figure of merit, and they were stratified by case characteristics using the Mann-Whitney U test. The Spearman rank test was used to explore the association between radiologists' performances and their work experience in mammogram interpretation. Results: There were significantly higher performances of Australian radiologists compared with Shanghai radiologists in low breast density for case sensitivity, lesion sensitivity, ROC, and JAFROC in the FFDM set ( P < 0.0001 ); in high breast density, Shanghai radiologists' performances in lesion sensitivity and JAFROC were also lower than Australian radiologists ( P < 0.0001 ). In the DBT test set, Australian radiologists performed better than Shanghai radiologists in cancer detection in both low and high breast density. The work experience of Australian radiologists was positively linked to their diagnostic performances, whereas this association was not statistically significant in Shanghai radiologists. Conclusion: There were significant variations in reading performances between Australian and Shanghai radiologists in FFDM and DBT across different levels of breast density, lesion types, and lesion sizes. An effective training initiative tailored to suit local readers is essential to enhancing the diagnostic accuracy of Shanghai radiologists.

Efficacy and Safety of Nutrient Supplements for Glycaemic Control and Insulin Resistance in Type 2 Diabetes: An Umbrella Review and Hierarchical Evidence Synthesis.

Background: Nutrient supplements are widely used for type 2 diabetes (T2D), yet evidence-based guidance for clinicians is lacking. Methods: We searched the four electronic databases from November 2015−December 2021. The most recent, most comprehensive, high-ranked systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and/or umbrella reviews of randomised controlled trials in adults with T2D were included. Data were extracted on study characteristics, aggregate outcome measures per group (glycaemic control, measures of insulin sensitivity and secretion), adverse events, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessments. Quality was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews Version 2.0 (AMSTAR 2). Results: Twelve meta-analyses and one umbrella review were included. There was very low certainty evidence that chromium, Vitamin C, and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (Ω-3 PUFAs) were superior to placebo for the primary outcome of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (Mean Difference/MD −0.54, −0.54 and ES −0.27, respectively). Probiotics were superior to placebo for HbA1c (Weighted Mean Difference/WMD −0.43%). There was very low certainty evidence that Vitamin D was superior to placebo for lowering HbA1c in trials of <6 months (MD −0.17%). Magnesium, zinc, Vitamin C, probiotics, and polyphenols were superior to placebo for FBG. Vitamin D was superior to placebo for insulin resistance. Data on safety was limited. Conclusions: Future research should identify who may benefit from nutrient supplementation, safety, and optimal regimens and formulations.

Impact of Hours Awake and Hours Slept at Night on Radiologists' Mammogram Interpretations.

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether radiologists' mammogram reading performance varies according to how long they have been awake ("hours awake") and the number of hours they slept ("hours slept") the night before a reading session. METHODS: Retrospective data were retrieved from the BreastScreen Reader Assessment Strategy database. Malignancy-enriched mammographic readings were performed by 133 radiologists. Information on their hours awake and hours slept was collected. Analysis of covariance was performed to determine whether these two variables influenced radiologists' sensitivity, specificity, lesion sensitivity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and jackknife alternative free-response ROC. Radiologists were divided into a more experienced and a less experienced groups (based on reading ≥2,000 and <2,000 mammogram readings per year, respectively). RESULTS: The hours awake significantly influenced less experienced radiologists' lesion sensitivity (F6,63 = 2.51; P = .03). Those awake for <2 hours had significantly lower lesion sensitivity than those awake for 8 to 10 hours (P = .01), and those awake for 4 to 6 hours had significantly lower lesion sensitivity than those awake for 8 to 10 hours (P = .002) and 10 to 12 hours (P = .02). The hours slept also influenced the ROC values of less experienced radiologists (F1,68 = 4.96; P = .02). Radiologists with up to 6 hours of sleep had a significantly lower value (0.72) than those who had slept more than 6 hours (0.77). No statistically significant findings were noted for more experienced radiologists. CONCLUSION: Inexperienced radiologists' performance may be influenced by the hours awake and hours slept before reading sessions.

Telereporting in Breast Imaging Involving More Than 1 Country Requires Careful Consideration.

PURPOSE: To examine the effect that a test set from 1 region of the world has on the performance of expert breast radiologists from that region and from a distant region. METHODS: Forty-seven Australian and 15 Singaporean breast radiologists interpreted the same test set (ie, 60 mammograms of Australian women consisting of 40 typical and 20 atypical cases) in their respective locations. The radiologists assigned each case a confidence score of 1 to 5, where 1 was typical, 2 was benign, and 3 to 5 indicated identifiable cancer. Localization-response operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC), receiver operating characteristic AUC, location sensitivity, case sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for each radiologist and compared between Australian and Singaporean readers using nonparametric 2-tailed Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Australian readers performed better than did their Singaporean counterparts with respect to localization-response operating characteristic AUC (.738 vs .642, P = .0395) and location sensitivity (.775 vs .660, P = .0185). DISCUSSION: Technological advancement has made possible telereporting, in which radiologists report on mammograms originating from other countries. However, those readers' levels of performance might be affected by interpreting images from populations that are different from those with which they are familiar. CONCLUSION: Radiologist performance differed between the groups when localization of lesions was taken into account. This difference might be because of the Australians' reading mammograms from populations with which they were familiar, in contrast to the Singaporeans.

Mammographic interpretation in Vietnam: Tailored educational strategies are needed to increase clinicians' expertise.

AIM: Breast cancer incidence is rapidly increasing throughout South East Asia, highlighting the need for high-quality early diagnosis and treatment. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of mammography detection in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), Vietnam, using data from Australian radiologists as a benchmark; factors that influence performance will be highlighted. METHODS: A total of 53, 35 and 52 clinicians from Australia, HCMC and Hanoi, respectively, examined and diagnosed a test set of 60 mammograms, 20 of which contained cancers. Each clinician completed an accompanying questionnaire establishing demographic and experiential characteristics. The performance metrics of specificity, sensitivity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), location sensitivity and Jackknife free-response ROC (JAFROC) figure of merit were used to evaluate clinicians performance. Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis statistical methods were employed to establish significance. RESULTS: Vietnamese radiologists demonstrated significantly lower sensitivity, AUC, lesion sensitivity and JAFROC scores compared to Australian radiologists. There was no difference in performance between clinicians from Hanoi and HCMC. However, certain performance features (older and more experienced clinicians compared with their younger, less experienced counterparts, readers who read more compared with fewer mammograms per week, clinicians with greater radiological experience and clinicians that completed a fellowship) demonstrated significantly better performances. CONCLUSIONS: The significant difference in diagnostic efficacy of mammograms between Vietnam and Australia identifies the need for improvements in breast radiology training, management and practice. Cost-effective solutions are available that can improve the reading efficacy of clinicians, and consequently health outcomes for Vietnamese women.

Reader characteristics and mammogram features associated with breast imaging reporting scores.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to explore the reading performances of radiologists in detecting cancers on mammograms using Tabar Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) classification and identify factors related to breast imaging reporting scores. METHODS: 117 readings of five different mammogram test sets with each set containing 20 cancer and 40 normal cases were performed by Australian radiologists. Each radiologist evaluated the mammograms using the BIRADS lexicon with category 1 - negative, category 2 - benign findings, category 3 - equivocal findings (Recall), category 4 - suspicious findings (Recall), and category 5 - highly suggestive of malignant findings (Recall). Performance metrics (true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative) were calculated for each radiologist and the distribution of reporting categories was analyzed in reader-based and case-based groups. The association of reader characteristics and case features among categories was examined using Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS: 38% of cancer-containing mammograms were reported with category 3 which decreased to 32.3% with category 4 and 16.2% with category 5 while 16.6 and 10.3% of cancer cases were marked with categories 1 and 2. Female readers had less false-negative rates when using categories 1 and 2 for cancer cases than male readers (p < 0.01). A similar pattern as gender category was also found in Breast Screen readers and readers completed breast reading fellowships compared with non-Breast Screen and non-fellowship readers (p < 0.05). Radiologists with low number of cases read per week were more likely to record the cancer cases with category 4 while the ones with high number of cases were with category 3 (p < 0.01). Discrete mass and asymmetric density were the two types of abnormalities reported mostly as equivocal findings with category 3 (47-50%; p = 0.005) while spiculated mass or stellate lesions were mostly selected as highly suggestive of malignancy with category 5 (26%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most radiologists used category 3 when reporting cancer mammograms. Gender, working for BreastScreen, fellowship completion, and number of cases read per week were factors associated with scoring selection. Radiologists reported higher Tabar BIRADS category for specific types of abnormalities on mammograms than others. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The study identified factors associated with the decision of radiologists in assigning a BIRADS Tabar score for mammograms with abnormality. These findings will be useful for individual training programs to improve the confidence of radiologists in recognizing abnormal lesions on screening mammograms.

Improvement of Cancer Detection on Mammograms via BREAST Test Sets.

BACKGROUND: Breast Screen Reader Assessment Strategy (BREAST) is an innovative training and research program for radiologists in Australia and New Zealand. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of BREAST test sets in improving readers' performance in detecting cancers on mammograms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2011 and 2018, 50 radiologists (40 fellows, 10 registrars) completed three BREAST test sets and 17 radiologists completed four test sets. Each test set contained 20 biopsy-proven cancer and 40 normal cases. Immediate image-based feedback was available to readers after they completed each test set which allowed the comparison of their selections with the truth. Case specificity, case sensitivity, lesion sensitivity, the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Area Under the Curve (AUC) and Jackknife Free-Response Receiver Operating Characteristic (JAFROC) Figure of Merit (FOM) were calculated for each reader. Kruskal-Wallis test was utilized to compare scores of the radiologist and registrars across all test-sets whilst Wilcoxon signed rank test was to compare the scores between pairs of test sets. RESULTS: Significant improvements in lesion sensitivity ranging from 21% to 31% were found in radiologists completing later test sets compared to first test set (p ≤ 0.01). Eighty three percent of radiologists achieved higher performance in lesion sensitivity after they completed the first read. Registrars had significantly better scores in the third test set compared to the first set with mean increases of 79% in lesion sensitivity (p = 0.005) and 37% in JAFROC (p = 0.02). Sixty percent and 100% of registrars increased their scores in lesion sensitivity in the second and third reads compared to the first read while the percentage of registrars with higher scores in JAFROC was 80%. CONCLUSION: Introduction of BREAST into national training programs appears to have an important impact in promoting diagnostic efficacy amongst radiologists and radiology registrars undergoing mammographic readings.

Mammographic densities of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women living in Australia's Northern Territory.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the mammographic densities and other characteristics of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women screened in Australia. METHODS: Population screening programme data of Aboriginal (n = 857) and non-Aboriginal women (n = 3236) were used. Mann-Whitney U test compared ages at screening and Chi-square tests compared personal and clinical information. Logistic regression analysis was used for density groupings. OR and 95% CI were calculated for multivariate association for density. RESULTS: Mammographic density was lower amongst Aboriginal women (P < 0.001). For non-Aboriginal women, higher density was associated with younger age (OR 2.4, 95% CI 2.1-2.8), recall to assessment (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.0), family history of breast cancer (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6), English-speaking background (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6), and residence in remote areas (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4). For Aboriginal women, density was associated with younger age (OR 2.7, 95% CI 2.0-3.5; P < 0.001), and recall to assessment (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.4-3.9; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women were found. There were more significant associations for dense breasts for non-Aboriginal women than for Aboriginal women.

Breast screening attendance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women in the Northern Territory of Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To compare breast screening attendances of Indigenous and non-Indigenous women. METHODS: A total of 4,093 BreastScreen cases were used including 857 self-identified Indigenous women. Chi-squared analysis compared data between Indigenous and non-Indigenous women. Logistic regression was used for groupings based on visits-to-screening frequency. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for associations with low attendance. RESULTS: Indigenous women were younger and had fewer visits to screening compared with non-Indigenous women. Non-English speaking was mainly associated with fewer visits for Indigenous women only (OR 1.9, 95%CI 1.3-2.9). Living remotely was associated with fewer visits for non-Indigenous women only (OR 1.3, 95%CI 1.1-1.5). Shared predictors were younger age (OR 12.3, 95%CI 8.1-18.8; and OR 11.5, 95%CI 9.6-13.7, respectively) and having no family history of breast cancer (OR 2.1, 95%CI 1.3-3.3; and OR 1.8, 95%CI 1.5-2.1, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Factors associated with fewer visits to screening were similar for both groups of women, except for language which was significant only for Indigenous women, and remoteness which was significant only for non-Indigenous women. Implications for public health: Health communication in Indigenous languages may be key in encouraging participation and retaining Indigenous women in BreastScreen; improving access for remote-living non-Indigenous women should also be addressed.

Benefits of Independent Double Reading in Digital Mammography: A Theoretical Evaluation of All Possible Pairing Methodologies.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To establish the efficacy of pairing readers randomly and evaluate the merits of developing optimal pairing methodologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sensitivity, specificity, and proportion correct were computed for three different case sets that were independently read by 16 radiologists. Performance of radiologists as single readers was compared to expected double reading performance. We theoretically evaluated all possible pairing methodologies. Bootstrap resampling methods were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Significant improvements in expected performance for double versus single reading (ie, delta performance) were shown for all performance measures and case-sets (p ≤ .003), with overall delta performance across all theoretically possible pairing schemes (n = 10,395) ranging between .05 and .08. Delta performance for the 20 best pairing schemes was significant (p < .001) and ranged between .07 and .10. Delta performance for 20 random pairing schemes was also significant (p ≤ .003) and ranged between .05 and .08. Delta performance for the 20 worst pairing schemes ranged between .03 and .06, reaching significance in delta proportion correct (p ≤ .021) for all three case-sets and in delta specificity for two case-sets (p ≤ .033) but not for a third case-set (p = .131), and not reaching significance in delta sensitivity for any of the three case-sets (.098 ≥ p ≥ .067). CONCLUSION: Significant benefits accrue from double reading, and while random reader pairing achieves most double reading benefits, a strategic pairing approach may maximize the benefits of double reading.

Breast Cancer Diagnostic Efficacy in a Developing South-East Asian Country

Background: Breast cancer, is increasing in prevalence amongst South East (SE) Asian women, highlighting the need for high quality, early diagnoses. This study investigated radiologists' detection efficacy in a developing (DC) and developed (DDC) SE Asian country, as compared to Australian radiologists. Methods: Using a test-set of 60 mammographic cases, 20 containing cancer, JAFROC figures of merit (FOM) and ROC area under the curves (AUC) were calculated as well as location sensitivity, sensitivity and specificity. The test set was examined by 35, 15, and 53 radiologists from DC, a DDC and Australia, respectively. Results: DC radiologists, compared to both groups of counterparts, demonstrated significantly lower JAFROC FOM, ROC AUC and specificity scores. DC radiologists had a significantly lower location sensitivity than Australian radiologists. DC radiologists also demonstrated significantly lower values for age, hours of reading per week, and years of mammography experience when compared with other radiologists. Conclusion: Significant differences in breast cancer detection parameters can be attributed to the experience of DC radiologists. The development of inexpensive, innovative, interactive training programs are discussed. This nonuniform level of breast cancer detection between countries must be addressed to achieve the World Health Organisation goal of health equity.

Radiologists can detect the 'gist' of breast cancer before any overt signs of cancer appear.

Radiologists can detect abnormality in mammograms at above-chance levels after a momentary glimpse of an image. The study investigated this instantaneous perception of an abnormality, known as a "gist" response, when 23 radiologists viewed prior mammograms of women that were reported as normal, but later diagnosed with breast cancer at subsequent screening. Five categories of cases were included: current cancer-containing mammograms, current mammograms of the normal breast contralateral to the cancer, prior mammograms of normal cases, prior mammograms with visible cancer signs in a breast from women who were initially reported as normal, but later diagnosed with breast cancer at subsequent screening in the same breast, and prior mammograms without any visible cancer signs from women labelled as initially normal but subsequently diagnosed with cancer. Our findings suggest that readers can distinguish patients who were diagnosed with cancer, from individuals without breast cancer (normal category), at above-chance levels based on a half-second glimpse of the mammogram even before any lesion becomes visible on the mammogram. Although 20 of the 23 radiologists demonstrated this ability, radiologists' abilities for perceiving the gist of the abnormal varied between the readers and appeared to be linked to expertise. These results could have implications for identifying women of higher than average risk of a future malignancy event, thus impacting upon tailored screening strategies.

Breast Cancer in Australian Indigenous Women: Incidence, Mortality, and Risk Factors

The Indigenous people of Australia face significant health gaps compared with the general population, with lower life expectancies, higher rates of death, and chronic illness occurring more often than in non-indigenous Australians. Cancer is the second largest contributor to the burden of disease with breast cancer being the most common invasive cancer diagnosed for females. Despite a lower breast cancer incidence compared with non-indigenous women, fatalities occur at an elevated rate and breast cancers have an earlier age of onset. For indigenous women there are also more advanced and distant tumours at diagnosis, fewer hospitalisations for breast cancer, and lower participation in breast screening. Concomitantly there are demographic, socio-economic and lifestyle factors associated with breast cancer risks that are heavily represented within Indigenous communities. The aim of this two-part narrative review is to examine the available evidence on breast cancer and its risk factors in Australian Indigenous women. Part One presents a summary of the latest incidence, survival and mortality data. Part Two presents the risk factors most strongly associated with breast cancer including age, place of residence, family risk, genetics, reproductive history, tobacco use, alcohol intake, physical activity, participation in screening and breast density. With increasing emphasis on personalized health care, a clear understanding of breast cancer incidence, survival, mortality, and causal agents within the Indigenous population is required if breast cancer prevention and management is to be optimized for Indigenous Australians.

Impact of Breast Reader Assessment Strategy on mammographic radiologists' test reading performance.

INTRODUCTION: The detection of breast cancer is somewhat limited by human factors, and thus there is a need to improve reader performance. This study assesses whether radiologists who regularly undertake the education in the form of the Breast Reader Assessment Strategy (BREAST) demonstrate any changes in mammography interpretation performance over time. METHODS: In 2011, 2012 and 2013, 14 radiologists independently assessed a year-specific BREAST mammographic test-set. Radiologists read a different single test-set once each year, with each comprising 60 digital mammogram cases. Radiologists marked the location of suspected lesions without computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) and assigned a confidence rating of 2 for benign and 3-5 for malignant lesions. The mean sensitivity, specificity, location sensitivity, JAFROC FOM and ROC AUC were calculated. A Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the readings for the 14 radiologists across the 3 years. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to assess comparison between pairs of years. Relationships between changes in performance and radiologist characteristics were examined using a Spearman's test. RESULTS: Significant increases were noted in mean sensitivity (P = 0.01), specificity (P = 0.01), location sensitivity (P = 0.001) and JAFROC FOM (P = 0.001) between 2011 and 2012. Between 2012 and 2013, significant improvements were noted in mean sensitivity (P = 0.003), specificity (P = 0.002), location sensitivity (P = 0.02), JAFROC FOM (P = 0.005) and ROC AUC (P = 0.008). No statistically significant correlations were shown between the levels of improvement and radiologists' characteristics. CONCLUSION: Radiologists' who undertake the BREAST programme demonstrate significant improvements in test-set performance during a 3-year period, highlighting the value of ongoing education through the use of test-set.

Certain performance values arising from mammographic test set readings correlate well with clinical audit.

INTRODUCTION: Test sets have been increasingly utilised to augment clinical audit in breast screening programmes; however, their relationship has never been satisfactorily understood. This study examined the relationship between mammographic test set performance and clinical audit data. METHODS: Clinical audit data over a 2-year period was generated for each of 20 radiologists. Sixty mammographic examinations, consisting of 40 normal and 20 cancer cases, formed the test set. Readers located any identifiable cancer, and levels of confidence were scored from 2 to 5, where a score of 3 and above is considered a recall rating. Jackknifing free response operating characteristic (JAFROC) figure-of-merit (FOM), location sensitivity and specificity were calculated for individual readers and then compared with clinical audit values using Spearman's rho. RESULTS: JAFROC FOM showed significant correlations to: recall rate at a first round of screening (r = 0.51; P = 0.02); rate of small invasive cancers per 10 000 reads (r = 0.5; P = 0.02); percentage of all cancers read that were not recalled (r = -0.51; P = 0.02); and sensitivity (r = 0.51; P = 0.02). Location sensitivity demonstrated significant correlations with: rate of small invasive cancers per 10 000 reads (r = 0.46; P = 0.04); rate of DCIS (ductal carcinoma in situ) per 10 000 reads (r = 0.44; P = 0.05); detection rate of all invasive cancers and DCIS per 10 000 reads (r = 0.54; P = 0.01); percentage of all cancers read that were not recalled (r = -0.57; P = 0.009); and sensitivity (r = 0.57; P = 0.009). No other significant relationships were noted. CONCLUSION: Performance indicators from test set demonstrate significant correlations with specific aspects of clinical performance, although caution needs to be exercised when generalising test set specificity to the clinical situation.

Evaluation of the effect of zoom function on lesion detection by soft-copy reading of screening mammograms.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of zooming in improving screen-reader performance in reporting digital mammograms. METHOD: Two experiments were conducted. In the first experiment, 5 readers were asked to report 59 two-view bilateral mammograms retrospectively with zooming function turned off. The second session was similar to the first one except that zooming was enabled. The task of readers was to assess if the mammograms were normal or abnormal and rate the confidence levels for each of the lesion they detected. The reader performances were evaluated via case sensitivity, lesion sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) and jackknife free-response receiver operating characteristics (JAFROC) figure of merit (FOM). RESULTS: There was no significant improvement in overall reader performance in detecting abnormalities in zooming condition compared with no zooming in terms of case sensitivity (96% and 87%, P = 0.285) or lesion sensitivity (88% and 81%, P = 0.224). However, differences in ROC AUC and JAFROC FOM (P ≤ 0.05) were found in two readers when they performed the test set with zooming function. CONCLUSION: The results suggested that the use of the zooming function did improve the performance of some readers in detecting abnormal cases.