ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2023
What Works Where and How for Uptake and Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Pathology: Review of Theories for a Realist Evaluation.
Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence predictive analytics in heart failure: results of the pilot phase of a pragmatic randomized clinical trial.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Trial
- Artificial intelligence in genitourinary pathology.Histopathology · 2026Review
- Digital pathology and artificial intelligence in breast and gynecologic oncology: from molecular prediction to multimodal integration.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Article
- Augmented reality microscopy to bridge trust between AI and pathologists.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Predicting Nottingham grade in breast cancer digital pathology using a foundation model.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- Socialising artificial intelligence in diagnostic cellular pathology.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
- Rethinking Barriers and Enablers in Qualitative Health Research: Limitations, Alternatives, and Enhancements.Qualitative health research · 2024Article
- Bridging the Gap: Challenges and Strategies for the Implementation of Artificial Intelligence-based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Clinical Practice.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2024Review
- How, for whom, and in what contexts will artificial intelligence be adopted in pathology? A realist interview study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Review
- Diagnosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma via a deep learning model with whole-slide images.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
- Diagnostic efficacy of cytologic smear and pathologic histology in the differential diagnosis of distal biliary stricture via EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing interest in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in pathology to increase accuracy and efficiency. To date, studies of clinicians' perceptions of AI have found only moderate acceptability, suggesting the need for further research regarding how to integrate it into clinical practice.
objectiveThe aim of the study was to determine contextual factors that may support or constrain the uptake of AI in pathology.
methodsTo go beyond a simple listing of barriers and facilitators, we drew on the approach of realist evaluation and undertook a review of the literature to elicit stakeholders' theories of how, for whom, and in what circumstances AI can provide benefit in pathology. Searches were designed by an information specialist and peer-reviewed by a second information specialist. Searches were run on the arXiv.org repository, MEDLINE, and the Health Management Information Consortium, with additional searches undertaken on a range of websites to identify gray literature. In line with a realist approach, we also made use of relevant theory. Included documents were indexed in NVivo 12, using codes to capture different contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes that could affect the introduction of AI in pathology. Coded data were used to produce narrative summaries of each of the identified contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes, which were then translated into theories in the form of context-mechanism-outcome configurations.
resultsA total of 101 relevant documents were identified. Our analysis indicates that the benefits that can be achieved will vary according to the size and nature of the pathology department's workload and the extent to which pathologists work collaboratively; the major perceived benefit for specialist centers is in reducing workload. For uptake of AI, pathologists' trust is essential. Existing theories suggest that if pathologists are able to "make sense" of AI, engage in the adoption process, receive support in adapting their work processes, and can identify potential benefits to its introduction, it is more likely to be accepted.
conclusionsFor uptake of AI in pathology, for all but the most simple quantitative tasks, measures will be required that either increase confidence in the system or provide users with an understanding of the performance of the system. For specialist centers, efforts should focus on reducing workload rather than increasing accuracy. Designers also need to give careful thought to usability and how AI is integrated into pathologists' workflow.
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.