Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39843399›Full record

ReviewVeterinary clinical pathology2025

Harnessing artificial intelligence for enhanced veterinary diagnostics: A look to quality assurance, Part II External validation.

Christina Pacholec, Bente Flatland, Hehuang Xie, Kurt Zimmerman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary clinical pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

4 authors.

Christina PacholecDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0535-1569
Bente FlatlandDepartment of Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0956-5895
Hehuang XieDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia, USA.
Kurt ZimmermanDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia, USA.

Funding

American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation Grant 03102-AMorris Animal Foundation D24CA-405Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine Veterinary Memorial Fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging as a valuable diagnostic tool in veterinary medicine, offering affordable and accessible tests that can match or even exceed the performance of medical professionals in similar tasks. Despite the promising outcomes of using AI systems (AIS) as highly accurate diagnostic tools, the field of quality assurance in AIS is still in its early stages. Our Part I manuscript focused on the development and technical validation of an AIS. In Part II, we explore the next step in development: external validation (i.e., in silico testing). This phase is a critical quality assurance component for any AIS intended for medical use, ensuring that high-quality diagnostics remain the standard in veterinary medicine. The quality assurance process for evaluating an AIS involves rigorous: (1) investigation of sources of bias, (2) application of calibration methods and prediction of uncertainty, (3) implementation of safety monitoring systems, and (4) assessment of repeatability and robustness. Testing with unseen data is an essential part of in silico testing, as it ensures the accuracy and precision of the AIS output.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligencePathology, VeterinaryQuality Assurance, Health CareVeterinary MedicineAnimalsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID39843399
PMCPMC12852970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.