ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2024
Machine learning classification of diagnostic accuracy in pathologists interpreting breast biopsies.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Prior Diagnosis on Second Opinions and Pathologist Viewing Behaviors: Results from a Randomized Trial in Breast Pathology.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Trial
- Telepathology and Mobile Health System for Province-Wide Pathology Consultation in Henan, China: Retrospective Evaluation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Characterizing Interpretive and Diagnostic Competency Development in Pathology Training.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2025Article
- Analysis of the predictive postoperative recurrence performance of three lymph node staging systems in patients with colon cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Movement Sensing Opportunities for Monitoring Dynamic Cognitive States.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Celebrating Eta Berner and her influence on biomedical and health informatics.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Comparison of the predictive performance of three lymph node staging systems for late-onset gastric cancer patients after surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study explores the feasibility of using machine learning to predict accurate versus inaccurate diagnoses made by pathologists based on their spatiotemporal viewing behavior when evaluating digital breast biopsy images. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study gathered data from 140 pathologists of varying experience levels who each reviewed a set of 14 digital whole slide images of breast biopsy tissue. Pathologists' viewing behavior, including zooming and panning actions, was recorded during image evaluation. A total of 30 features were extracted from the viewing behavior data, and 4 machine learning algorithms were used to build classifiers for predicting diagnostic accuracy.
resultsThe Random Forest classifier demonstrated the best overall performance, achieving a test accuracy of 0.81 and area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve of 0.86. Features related to attention distribution and focus on critical regions of interest were found to be important predictors of diagnostic accuracy. Further including case-level and pathologist-level information incrementally improved classifier performance. DISCUSSION: Results suggest that pathologists' viewing behavior during digital image evaluation can be leveraged to predict diagnostic accuracy, affording automated feedback and decision support systems based on viewing behavior to aid in training and, ultimately, clinical practice. They also carry implications for basic research examining the interplay between perception, thought, and action in diagnostic decision-making.
conclusionThe classifiers developed herein have potential applications in training and clinical settings to provide timely feedback and support to pathologists during diagnostic decision-making. Further research could explore the generalizability of these findings to other medical domains and varied levels of expertise.
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.