Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39927568›Full record

ArticlePediatric and developmental pathology : the official journal of the Society for Pediatric Pathology and the Paediatric Pathology Society

Validation of A Nationwide Digital Pediatric Pathology Consultation Network.

Haiying Chen, Juan Putra, Anita Nagy, Jefferson Terry, Dina El Demellawy, Joseph de Nanassy, Erica Schollenberg, Aaron Haig, Camelia Stefanovici, Kathryn Whelan and 6 more

Abstract readValidation StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric and developmental pathology : the official journal of the Society for Pediatric Pathology and the Paediatric Pathology Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Haiying ChenDivision of Pathology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8026-7578
Juan PutraDivision of Pathology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3487-4641
Anita NagyDivision of Pathology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2904-0618
Jefferson TerryAnatomical Pathology, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5464-8679
Dina El DemellawyDepartment of Pathology, The Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, ON, Canada.
Joseph de NanassyDepartment of Pathology, The Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2649-2392
Erica SchollenbergDivision of Anatomical Pathology, IWK Health Centre, NS, Canada.
Aaron HaigDepartment of Pathology, London Health Sciences Centre, ON, Canada.
Camelia StefanoviciDepartment of Pathology, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, MB, Canada.
Kathryn WhelanFaculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada.
Alysa PoulinPathology and Laboratory Medicine, Royal University Hospital, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Dorothee Dal SoglioDepartment of Pathology, CHU-St. Justine, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Zesheng ChenDepartment of Pathology, CHU-St. Justine, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Brian SmithCentre for Global Child Health, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Cindy FioreCentre for Global Child Health, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Gino R SomersDivision of Pathology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3830-7959

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital pathology facilitates remote pathology consultations. Pediatric pathologists in Canada formed a nationwide digital pathology consultation network, mostly for second opinion review of pediatric cancer cases. Validation of such a large network for clinical use is challenging. Here we report our unique validation process of this digital pathology network.

methodThis study was designed in keeping with the College of American Pathologist (CAP) guidelines, and included 14 pathologists from 9 hospitals across Canada. All cases are pediatric pathology cases. Each pathologist reviewed multiple digital cases and the corresponding glass slide cases. For each review, intra-observer concordance (diagnosis on digital case versus diagnosis on glass slide case) was recorded, creating a data point.

resultThe study generated 269 valid diagnostic data points. Out of the 269 data points, 257 were concordant (95.5% concordance), exceeding the CAP recommendation of 95% concordance. Thus, the network was successfully validated.

conclusionThis is a unique validation study for a large nationwide digital pediatric pathology network. The study involved all pathologists/hospitals in the network, closely emulating real world clinical process. The network was successfully validated.

Indexed as

Pathology, ClinicalPediatricsRemote ConsultationTelepathologyCanadaChildHumansObserver VariationPathologistsReproducibility of Resultsconsultationdigital pathologynationwidepediatricvalidationwhole slide imaging

Identifiers

PMID39927568
PMCPMC12053124

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.