ArticleDiagnostic pathology2014
iPathology cockpit diagnostic station: validation according to College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center recommendation at the Hospital Trust and University of Verona.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Technical and Diagnostic Issues in Whole Slide Imaging Published Validation Studies.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Diagnostic concordance and discordance in digital pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical pathology · 2021Pooled it
- The performance of digital microscopy for primary diagnosis in human pathology: a systematic review.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2019Pooled it
- Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study).The American journal of surgical pathology · 2018Trial
- Mobile device smartphones for intraoperative diagnosis at the University Hospital Trust of Modena/UNIMORE: from validation process to costs analysis.Diagnostic pathology · 2026Article
- Benchmarking digital displays (monitors) for histological diagnoses: the nephropathology use case.Journal of clinical pathology · 2025Article
- Digital pathology structure and deployment in Veneto: a proof-of-concept study.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2024Article
- Digital pathology systems enabling quality patient care.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 2023Review
- Validation of a Novel Three-Dimensional (Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Integrating digital pathology into clinical practice.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022Review
- An Expandable Informatics Framework for Enhancing Central Cancer Registries with Digital Pathology Specimens, Computational Imaging Tools, and Advanced Mining Capabilities.Journal of pathology informatics · 2022Article
- Validation of portable tablets for transplant pathology diagnosis according to the College of American Pathologists Guidelines.Academic pathology · 2022Article
- Digital pathology all stars.Journal of pathology informatics · 2022Article
- Integrated digital pathology at scale: A solution for clinical diagnostics and cancer research at a large academic medical center.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Commentary: The Digital Fate of Glomeruli in Renal Biopsy.Journal of pathology informatics · 2021Article
- Digital Slides as an Effective Tool for Programmed Death Ligand 1 Combined Positive Score Assessment and Training: Lessons Learned from the "Programmed Death Ligand 1 Key Learning Program in Head-and-Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma".Journal of pathology informatics · 2021Article
- Validation of a digital pathology system including remote review during the COVID-19 pandemic.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020Article
- Commentary: Impact of Digital Pathology in the Field of Intraoperative Neuropathology: Master the Tool.Journal of pathology informatics · 2020Article
- Whole slide imaging equivalency and efficiency study: experience at a large academic center.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2019Article
- Validation of digital microscopy in the histopathological diagnoses of oral diseases.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundValidation of digital whole slide images is crucial to ensure that diagnostic performance is at least equivalent to that of glass slides and light microscopy. The College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center recently developed recommendations for internal digital pathology system validation. Following these guidelines we sought to validate the performance of a digital approach for routine diagnosis by using an iPad and digital control widescreen-assisted workstation through a pilot study.
methodsFrom January 2014, 61 histopathological slides were scanned by ScanScope Digital Slides Scanner (Aperio, Vista, CA). Two independent pathologists performed diagnosis on virtual slides in front of a widescreen by using two computer devices (ImageScope viewing software) located to different Health Institutions (AOUI Verona) connected by local network and a remote image server using an iPad tablet (Aperio, Vista, CA), after uploading the Citrix receiver for iPad. Quality indicators related to image characters and work-flow of the e-health cockpit enterprise system were scored based on subjective (high vs poor) perception. The images were re-evaluated two weeks apart.
resultsThe whole glass slides encountered 10 liver: hepatocarcinoma, 10 renal carcinoma, 10 gastric carcinoma and 10 prostate biopsies: adenocarcinoma, 5 excisional skin biopsies: melanoma, 5 lymph-nodes: lymphoma. 6 immuno- and 5 special stains were available for intra- and internet remote viewing. Scan times averaged two minutes and 54 seconds per slide (standard deviation 2 minutes 34 seconds). Megabytes ranged from 256 to 680 (mean 390) per slide storage. Reliance on glass slide, image quality (resolution and color fidelity), slide navigation time, simultaneous viewers in geographically remote locations were considered of high performance score. Side by side comparisons between diagnosis performed on tissue glass slides versus widescreen were excellent showing an almost perfect concordance (0.81, kappa index).
conclusionsWe validated our institutional digital pathology system for routine diagnostic facing with whole slide images in a cockpit enterprise digital system or iPad tablet. Computer widescreens are better for diagnosing scanned glass slide that iPad. For urgent requests, iPad may be used. Legal aspects have to be soon faced with to permit the clinical use of this technology in a manner that does not compromise patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.