Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35545826›Full record

ReviewBrain tumor research and treatment2022

Digital Pathology and Artificial Intelligence Applications in Pathology.

Heounjeong Go

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain tumor research and treatment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Instruction tuning for colorectal histopathology: a multimodal vision-language assistant on human-evaluated data.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

1 author.

Heounjeong GoDepartment of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. damul37@amc.seoul.kr.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0412-8709

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital pathology is revolutionizing pathology. The introduction of digital pathology made it possible to comprehensively change the pathology diagnosis workflow, apply and develop pathological artificial intelligence (AI) models, generate pathological big data, and perform telepathology. AI algorithms, including machine learning and deep learning, are used for the detection, segmentation, registration, processing, and classification of digitized pathological images. Pathological AI algorithms can be helpfully utilized for diagnostic screening, morphometric analysis of biomarkers, the discovery of new meanings of prognosis and therapeutic response in pathological images, and improvement of diagnostic efficiency. In order to develop a successful pathological AI model, it is necessary to consider the selection of a suitable type of image for a subject, utilization of big data repositories, the setting of an effective annotation strategy, image standardization, and color normalization. This review will elaborate on the advantages and perspectives of digital pathology, AI-based approaches, the applications in pathology, and considerations and challenges in the development of pathological AI models.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceDeep learningDigital technologyPathologyWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID35545826
PMCPMC9098984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.