Lesson from the COVID-19 pandemic: pathologists need to build their confidence on working in a digital microscopy environment.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Comparison of FNA-based conventional cytology specimens and digital image analysis in assessment of pancreatic lesions.CytoJournal · 2023
   Article
2. Temporary Regulatory Deviations and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) PCR Labeling Update Study Indicate What Laboratory-Developed Test Regulation by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Could Look Like.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2021
   Review
3. Digital microscopy: A routine mandate in future? A leaf out of Covid-19 pandemic laboratory experience.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  The use of digital microscopy as a teaching method for human pathology: a systematic review.2020

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as