ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
Validation of diagnostic artificial intelligence models for prostate pathology in a Middle Eastern cohort.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) for pathology is accelerating cancer diagnostics. For global adoption, studies in currently under-represented populations - where the potential gains from AI may also be greatest - are needed. We present the first external validation study in a Middle Eastern setting, focusing on diagnosis and Gleason grading of prostate cancer. We digitised 339 prostate glass slides from Kurdistan, Iraq, representing a consecutive series of 185 patients from 2013 to 2024. Each slide was scanned on three digital pathology scanners, generating 1,017 whole-slide images. Task-specific and foundation AI models demonstrated AI-pathologist grading concordance similar to pathologist-pathologist concordance (Cohen's quadratically weighted kappa 0.801 vs. 0.799). Cross-scanner concordance was high (kappa > 0.90) for all AI models across three scanners. The demonstrated robust performance on a low-cost compact scanner could enable validation studies in non-digitalised settings and cost-effective AI adoption in laboratories with limited sample volumes. The publicly shared dataset supports further research to facilitate broader adoption of AI pathology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42858194What 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.