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 is the most common cancer among females worldwide and large volumes of breast images are produced and interpreted annually. As long as radiologists interpret these images, the diagnostic accuracy will be limited by human factors and both false-positive and false-negative errors might occur. By understanding visual search in breast images, we may be able to identify causes of diagnostic errors, find ways to reduce them, and also provide a better education to radiology residents. Many visual search studies in breast radiology have been devoted to mammography. These studies showed that 70% of missed lesions on mammograms attract radiologists’ visual attention and that a plethora of different reasons, such as satisfaction of search, incorrect background sampling, and incorrect first impression can cause diagnostic errors in the interpretation of mammograms. Recently, highly accurate tools, which rely on both eye-tracking data and the content of the mammogram, have been proposed to provide feedback to the radiologists. Improving these tools and determining the optimal pathway to integrate them in the radiology workflow could be a possible line of future research. Moreover, in the past few years deep learning has led to improving diagnostic accuracy of computerized diagnostic tools and visual search studies will be required to understand how radiologists interact with the prompts from these tools, and to identify the best way to utilize them. Visual search in other breast imaging modalities, such as breast ultrasound and digital breast tomosynthesis, have so far received less attention, probably due to associated complexities of eye-tracking monitoring and analysing the data. For example, in digital breast tomosynthesis, scrolling through the image results in longer trials, adds a new factor to the study’s complexity and makes calculation of gaze parameters more difficult. However, considering the wide utilization of three-dimensional imaging modalities, more visual search studies involving reading stack-view examinations are required in the future. To conclude, in the past few decades visual search studies provided extensive understanding about underlying reasons for diagnostic errors in breast radiology and characterized differences between experts’ and novices’ visual search patterns. Further visual search studies are required to investigate radiologists’ interaction with relatively newer imaging modalities and artificial intelligence tools.

Whole slide imaging (WSI) has the potential to be utilized in telepathology, teleconsultation, quality assurance, clinical education, and digital image analysis to aid pathologists. In this paper, the potential added benefits of computer-assisted image analysis in breast pathology are reviewed and discussed. One of the major advantages of WSI systems is the possibility of doing computer-based image analysis on the digital slides. The purpose of computer-assisted analysis of breast virtual slides can be (i) segmentation of desired regions or objects such as diagnostically relevant areas, epithelial nuclei, lymphocyte cells, tubules, and mitotic figures, (ii) classification of breast slides based on breast cancer (BCa) grades, the invasive potential of tumors, or cancer subtypes, (iii) prognosis of BCa, or (iv) immunohistochemical quantification. While encouraging results have been achieved in this area, further progress is still required to make computer-based image analysis of breast virtual slides acceptable for clinical practice.

Image interpretation is a fundamental aspect of radiology. The treatment and management of patients relies on accurate and timely imaging diagnosis. However, errors in radiological reports can negatively impact on patient health outcomes. These misdiagnoses can be caused by several different errors, but cognitive biases account for 74 % of all image interpretation errors. There are many biases that can impact on a radiologist's perception and cognitive processes. Several recent narrative reviews have discussed these cognitive biases and have offered possible strategies to mitigate their effects. However, these strategies remain untested. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review is to evaluate the current knowledge on the extent that cognitive biases impact on medical image interpretation. Scopus and Medline Databases were searched using relevant keywords to identify papers published between 2012 and 2022. A subsequent hand search of the narrative reviews was also performed. All studies collected were screened and assessed against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Twenty-four publications were included and categorised into five main themes: satisfaction of search, availability bias, hindsight bias, framing bias and other biases. From these studies, there were mixed results regarding the impact of cognitive biases, highlighting the need for further investigation in this area. Moreover, the limited and untested debiasing methods offered by a minority of the publications and narrative reviews also suggests the need for further research. The potential of role of artificial intelligence is also highlighted to further assist radiologists in identifying and mitigating these cognitive biases. Cognitive biases can impact radiologists' image interpretation, however the effectiveness of debiasing strategies remain largely untested.