Table 3.
Comparison between the BI-RADS classifications assigned by the radiologist and those assigned by the software, in relation to the histological classification (reference standard).
| BI-RADS classification | Histological classification | Total n (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benign n (%) | Malignant n (%) | |||
| Radiologist | Software | |||
| evaluation | evaluation | |||
| Category 3 | Category 2-3 | 66 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 66 (100.0) |
| Category 4A-4B | 32 (97.0) | 1 (3.0) | 33 (100.0) | |
| Category 4C-5 | 2 (66.7) | 1 (33.3) | 3 (100.0) | |
| Category 4A | Category 2-3 | 54 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 54 (100.0) |
| Category 4A-4B | 112 (89.6) | 13 (10.4) | 125 (100.0) | |
| Category 4C-5 | 0 (0.0) | 2 (100.0) | 2 (100.0) | |
| Category 4B | Category 2-3 | 2 (40.0) | 3 (60.0) | 5 (100.0) |
| Category 4A-4B | 32 (55.2) | 26 (44.8) | 58 (100.0) | |
| Category 4C-5 | 5 (45.5) | 6 (54.5) | 11 (100.0) | |
| Category 4C | Category 2-3 | 1 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (100.0) |
| Category 4A-4B | 10 (22.7) | 34 (77.3) | 44 (100.0) | |
| Category 4C-5 | 3 (3.3) | 121 (89.6) | 124 (100.0) | |
| Category 5 | Category 2-3 | 0 (0.0) | 1 (100.0) | 1 (100.0) |
| Category 4A-4B | 0 (0.0) | 10 (100.0) | 10 (100.0) | |
| Category 4C-5 | 0 (0.0) | 38 (100.0) | 38 (100.0) | |