ArticleJournal of clinical pathology2025
Use of quality checks and processes across digital histopathology: an initial survey from the Bigpicture consortium.
Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond prediction: AI as a mechanistic microscope and digital twin for colorectal cancer immunotherapy.Frontiers in immunology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsIn the end-to-end digital pathology workflow, variability can be introduced at each step, resulting in differences in the final image dataset. The effectiveness of quality control processes at each step of the workflow will impact the extent and relevance of this variability.
methodsTo assess the maturity of whole slide imaging (WSI) quality processes for the whole digital pathology workflow, we conducted an online questionnaire across 19 digitally active members of the Bigpicture consortium.
resultsA key finding was that a lower proportion of centres are implementing rigorous quality processes and checks processes at the post-scanning steps of the WSI workflow, such as 'digital reporting and display' (44%) and computational analysis (34%), when compared with pre-scanning steps such as 'pre-staining' (72%) and 'staining' (77%).
conclusionsThis information allows us to identify priorities for quality improvement of the overall WSI 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.