Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41986917›Full record

ArticleThe journal of pathology. Clinical research2026

HISTAI: a valuable dataset with a valuable lesson.

Katherine J Hewitt, Nic G Reitsam, Sebastian Foersch, Ramona Erber, Qinghe Zeng, Jakob Nikolas Kather

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of pathology. Clinical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Katherine J HewittElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6602-0141
Nic G ReitsamElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0070-3158
Sebastian FoerschInstitute of Pathology, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4740-6900
Ramona ErberInstitut für Pathologie, Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Qinghe ZengElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1473-8327
Jakob Nikolas KatherElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3730-5348

Funding

Breast Cancer Research Foundation BELLADONNA BCRF-25-225Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 535081457Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Germany's Excellence Strategy (EXC 2050/2)Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft TRR 412/1Deutsche Krebshilfe DECADE 70115166European Research Council NADIR 101114631Gemeinsame Bundesausschuss TransplantKI 01VSF2104German Academic Exchange Service SECAI 57616814German Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space CAMINO 01EO2101German Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space Come2Data 16DKZ2044AGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space DECIPHER-M 01KD2420AGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space DEEP-HCC 031L0315AGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space NextBIG 01ZU2402AGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space PEARL 01KD2104CGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space PROSURV 01KD2509CGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space TANGERINE 01KT2302 through ERA-NET TranscanGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space TRANSFORM LIVER 031L0312AHORIZON EUROPE Reforming and enhancing the European Research and Innovation system GENIAL 101096312HORIZON EUROPE Reforming and enhancing the European Research and Innovation system ODELIA 101057091National Institute for Health and Care Research, Leeds Biomedical Research Centre NIHR203331
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The application of artificial intelligence in computational pathology depends on both robust algorithms and high-quality, clinically reliable data. Progress in this field has been limited by the scarcity of large, diverse, and well-validated whole slide image (WSI) datasets. To address this gap, HISTAI introduced an open-source resource comprising over 112,000 WSIs across multiple organ systems with associated clinical metadata. Here, we present a pathologist-led evaluation of label accuracy, metadata completeness, and dataset composition across 328 selected cases from this resource. Although HISTAI reports 47,279 cases, we identified only 44,564 unique cases after accounting for missing entries and duplicate records. Basic demographic information, including age and sex, was available for only 55% of cases. Dataset composition was uneven, with dermatopathology accounting for 47.1% of cases and gastrointestinal pathology for 24.0%; however, primary specialty was explicitly reported for only 39.6% of cases, obscuring this imbalance within the provided metadata. Notably, clinical ground truth is recorded in the Conclusion column. Concordance between the dataset's Conclusion and Diagnosis fields was observed in only 20.7% of cases, while 27.1% contained conflicting diagnoses. In a focused review of 198 cases, 30.3% were found to contain unclear or ambiguous diagnostic conclusions, including eight cases in which the diagnosis was incorrect. Assessment of molecular annotation revealed that only 18.9% of analyzed lung and colorectal cancer cases included molecular information. Furthermore, among adult-type diffuse gliomas, none of the 55 cases met current World Health Organisation Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System 5th Edition (WHO CNS5) diagnostic criteria, with IDH mutation status reported in only 15 cases. Together, these findings highlight substantial ambiguities in ground-truth labeling, incomplete molecular annotation, and limited documentation of dataset provenance and ethical oversight. While HISTAI represents a valuable open-source resource, its effective and responsible use requires careful clinical validation and close collaboration between computational researchers and pathologists.

Indexed as

Pathology, ClinicalArtificial IntelligenceFemaleHumansMetadatacomputational pathologydata quality and reproducibilitydiagnostic concordanceground truth validationHISTAIopen‐access datasets

Identifiers

PMID41986917
PMCPMC13083215

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.