ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2016
Comparison of the diagnostic utility of digital pathology systems for telemicrobiology.
Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnosis of Human Trematode Infections.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Review
- Remote Reporting from Home for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Tertiary Oncology Center Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of pathology informatics · 2021Article
- Experience Reviewing Digital Pap Tests using a Gallery of Images.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
- The Use of Screencasts with Embedded Whole-Slide Scans and Hyperlinks to Teach Anatomic Pathology in a Supervised Digital Environment.Journal of pathology informatics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTelemicrobiology is a growing component of clinical microbiology informatics. However, few studies have been performed to assess the diagnostic utility of telemicroscopy systems in evaluating infectious agents.
objectiveEvaluate multiple contemporary digital pathology platforms for use in diagnostic telemicrobiology. MATERIALS AND
methodsA mix of thirty cases that included viral, bacterial, fungal, and parasitological findings were evaluated by four experts using ×40 whole slide imaging (WSI) scans, ×83 oil-immersion WSI scans, ×100 oil-immersion WSI scans, digital photomicrographs, and glass slides.
resultsThe ×83 WSI, ×100 WSI, and photomicrograph interpretations were not significantly different in quality and accuracy when compared to glass slide interpretations. The ×40 WSI interpretations were of lower quality and were more likely to be incorrect when compared to glass slide interpretations.
conclusionsIn this study, high magnification, oil-immersion digital pathology platforms are better suited to support telemicrobiology applications and yield interpretations on par with glass slide evaluations.
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.