ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2025
Robust ROI Detection in Whole Slide Images Guided by Pathologists' Viewing Patterns.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of an artificial intelligence model for basal cell carcinoma detection and section completeness assessment in Mohs micrographic surgery in an Asian cohort.JAAD international · 2026Article
- Ambient, real-time digitization and datafication of glass slide microscopy towards AI-at-the-microscope.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Longitudinal evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte scoring using automated region of interest registration in breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Swarm intelligence-guided ROI selection for deep learning assessment of HER2 in colorectal cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for triple-negative breast cancer from imaging to multi-omics.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning techniques offer improvements in computer-aided diagnosis systems. However, acquiring image domain annotations is challenging due to the knowledge and commitment required of expert pathologists. Pathologists often identify regions in whole slide images with diagnostic relevance rather than examining the entire slide, with a positive correlation between the time spent on these critical image regions and diagnostic accuracy. In this paper, a heatmap is generated to represent pathologists' viewing patterns during diagnosis and used to guide a deep learning architecture during training. The proposed system outperforms traditional approaches based on color and texture image characteristics, integrating pathologists' domain expertise to enhance region of interest detection without needing individual case annotations. Evaluating our best model, a U-Net model with a pre-trained ResNet-18 encoder, on a skin biopsy whole slide image dataset for melanoma diagnosis, shows its potential in detecting regions of interest, surpassing conventional methods with an increase of 20%, 11%, 22%, and 12% in precision, recall, F1-score, and Intersection over Union, respectively. In a clinical evaluation, three dermatopathologists agreed on the model's effectiveness in replicating pathologists' diagnostic viewing behavior and accurately identifying critical regions. Finally, our study demonstrates that incorporating heatmaps as supplementary signals can enhance the performance of computer-aided diagnosis systems. Without the availability of eye tracking data, identifying precise focus areas is challenging, but our approach shows promise in assisting pathologists in improving diagnostic accuracy and efficiency, streamlining annotation processes, and aiding the training of new pathologists.
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.