Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34012707›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2021

Remote Reporting from Home for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Tertiary Oncology Center Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Vidya Rao, Rajiv Kumar, Sathyanarayanan Rajaganesan, Swapnil Rane, Gauri Deshpande, Subhash Yadav, Asawari Patil, Trupti Pai, Santosh Menon, Aekta Shah and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

20 authors.

Vidya RaoDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Rajiv KumarDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Sathyanarayanan RajaganesanDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Swapnil RaneDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Gauri DeshpandeDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Subhash YadavDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Asawari PatilDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Trupti PaiDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Santosh MenonDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Aekta ShahDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Katha RabadeDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Mukta RamadwarDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Poonam PanjwaniDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Neha MittalDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Ayushi SahayDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Bharat RekhiDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Munita BalDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Uma SakhadeoDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Sumeet GujralDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Sangeeta DesaiDepartment of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the widespread adoption of digital pathology (DP) for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. This paradigm shift is likely to influence how we function routinely in the postpandemic era. We present learnings from early adoption of DP for a live digital sign-out from home in a risk-mitigated environment. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe aimed to validate DP for remote reporting from home in a real-time environment and evaluate the parameters influencing the efficiency of a digital workflow. Eighteen pathologists prospectively validated DP for remote use on 567 biopsy cases including 616 individual parts from 7 subspecialties over a duration from March 21, 2020, to June 30, 2020. The slides were digitized using Roche Ventana DP200 whole-slide scanner and reported from respective homes in a risk-mitigated environment.

resultsFollowing re-review of glass slides, there was no major discordance and 1.2% (

conclusionWe successfully validated and adopted a digital workflow for remote reporting with available resources and were able to provide our patients, an undisrupted access to subspecialty expertise during these unprecedented times.

Indexed as

Digital pathologyremote reportingwhole-slide imaging

Identifiers

PMID34012707
PMCPMC8112339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.