ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2020
(Re) Defining the High-Power Field for Digital Pathology.
Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mitotic activity: A systematic literature review of the assessment methodology and prognostic value in canine tumors.Veterinary pathology · 2024Pooled it
- Recent Advances in Automated Mitosis Detection in Digital Pathology: A PRISMA-Guided Systematic Review with Evaluation-Regime Stratification (2018-2025).Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Compositional and interpretable representation of histology using AI foundation models and sparse autoencoders.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A Hybrid Lung and Colon Histopathological Image Classification Framework Using MobileNetV3-Small Deep Features and Differential Evolution Optimization.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diagnosing orthopaedic infection by identifying neutrophils in whole histology slide images with machine learning trained on publicly available datasets.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Can artificial intelligence improve the diagnosis and management of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis?World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Nuclear morphological characterisation of lobular carcinoma variants: a morphometric study.Histopathology · 2025Article
- Article
- Exploring prognostic biomarkers in pathological images of colorectal cancer patients via deep learning.The journal of pathology. Clinical research · 2024Article
- An initial game-theoretic assessment of enhanced tissue preparation and imaging protocols for improved deep learning inference of spatial transcriptomics from tissue morphology.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Digital Pathology for Better Clinical Practice.Cancers · 2024Review
- Digital pathology systems enabling quality patient care.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 2023Review
- Review
- Article
- Review
- Defining the area of mitoses counting in invasive breast cancer using whole slide image.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022Article
- Integrating digital pathology into clinical practice.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022Review
- Counting mitoses: SI(ze) matters!Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2021Review
- Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Pathologist Training in the Time of COVID-19: Our Experience using a Digital Solution.Journal of pathology informatics · 2021Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThe microscope high-power field (HPF) is the cornerstone for histopathology diagnostic evaluation such as the quantification of mitotic figures, lymphocytes, and tumor grading. With traditional light microscopy, HPFs are typically evaluated by quantifying histologic events in 10 fields of view at × 400 magnification. In the era of digital pathology, new variables are introduced that may affect HPF evaluation. The aim of this study was to determine the parameters that influence HPF in whole slide images (WSIs). MATERIALS AND
methodsGlass slides scanned on various devices (Leica's Aperio GT450, AT2, and ScanScope XT; Philips UltraFast Scanner; Hamamatsu's Nanozoomer 2.0HT; and 3DHistech's P1000) were compared to acquired digital slides reviewed on each vendor's respective WSI viewer software (e.g., Aperio ImageScope, ImageScope DX, Philips IMS, 3DHistech CaseViewer, and Hamamatsu NDP.view) and an in-house developed vendor-agnostic viewer. WSIs were reviewed at "×40" equivalent HPF on different sized monitors with varying display resolutions (1900 × 1080-4500 × 3000) and aspect ratios (e.g., Food and Drug Administration [FDA]-cleared 27" Philips PS27QHDCR, FDA-cleared 24" Dell MR2416, 24" Hewlett Packard Z24n G2, and 28" Microsoft Surface Studio). Digital and microscopic HPF areas were calculated and compared.
resultsA significant variation of HPF area occurred between differing monitor size and display resolutions with minor differences between WSI viewers. No differences were identified by scanner or WSIs scanned at different resolutions (e.g., 0.5, 0.25, 0.24, and 0.12 μm/pixel).
conclusionGlass slide HPF at × 400 magnification with conventional light microscopy was not equivalent to "×40" digital HPF areas. Digital HPF quantification may vary due to differences in the tissue area displayed by monitor sizes, display resolutions, and WSI viewers but not by scanner or scanning resolution. These findings will need to be further clinically validated with potentially new digital metrics for evaluation.
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.