Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25722941›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2015

Virtual microscopy in the undergraduate teaching of pathology.

Oriol Ordi, Josep Antoni Bombí, Antonio Martínez, Josep Ramírez, Llúcia Alòs, Adela Saco, Teresa Ribalta, Pedro L Fernández, Elias Campo, Jaume Ordi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The use of digital microscopy as a teaching method for human pathology: a systematic review.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Oriol OrdiDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Josep Antoni BombíDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Antonio MartínezDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Josep RamírezDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Llúcia AlòsDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Adela SacoDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Teresa RibaltaDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Pedro L FernándezDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Elias CampoDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Jaume OrdiDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain ; Department of Pathology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain ; ISGlobal, Barcelona Center for International Health Research (CRESIB), Barcelona, Spain.
Universitat de Barcelona · ESBarcelona Institute for Global Health · ESHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle evidence is available concerning the impact of virtual microscopy (VM) in the undergraduate teaching of pathology. We aimed: (1) to determine the impact in student scores when moving from conventional microscopy (CM) to VM; (2) to assess the students' impressions and changes in study habits regarding the impact of this tool.

methodsWe evaluated two groups taking the discipline of pathology in the same course, one using CM and the other VM. The same set of slides used in the CM classes was digitized in a VENTANA iScan HT (Roche Diagnostics, Sant Cugat, Spain) at ×20 and observed by the students using the Virtuoso viewer (Roche Diagnostics). We evaluated the skill level reached by the students with an online test. A voluntary survey was undertaken by the VM group to assess the students' impressions regarding the resource. The day and time of any accession to the viewer were registered.

resultsThere were no differences between the two groups in their marks in the online test (mean marks for the CM and the VM groups: 9.87 ± 0.34 and 9.86 ± 0.53, respectively; P = 0.880). 86.6% of the students found the software friendly, easy-to-use and effective. 71.6% of the students considered navigation easier with VM than with CM. The most appreciated feature of VM was the possibility to access the images anywhere and at any time (93.3%). 57.5% of the accesses were made on holidays and 41.9% later than 6:00 pm.

conclusionsVirtual microscopy can effectively replace the traditional methods of learning pathology, providing mobility and convenience to medical students.

Indexed as

Pathologyundergraduate teachingwhole slide imaging

Identifiers

PMID25722941
PMCPMC4338491
OpenAlexW2060101660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.