Cited by 1,232AI in cancer detectionArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Digital pathology and artificial intelligence

Open access
Niazi, Muhammad Khalid Khan, Parwani, Anil V, Gurcan, Metin N·2019·The Lancet Oncology

Abstract

In modern clinical practice, digital pathology has a crucial role and is increasingly a technological requirement in the scientific laboratory environment. The advent of whole-slide imaging, availability of faster networks, and cheaper storage solutions has made it easier for pathologists to manage digital slide images and share them for clinical use. In parallel, unprecedented advances in machine learning have enabled the synergy of artificial intelligence and digital pathology, which offers image-based diagnosis possibilities that were once limited only to radiology and cardiology. Integration of digital slides into the pathology workflow, advanced algorithms, and computer-aided diagnostic techniques extend the frontiers of the pathologist's view beyond a microscopic slide and enable true utilisation and integration of knowledge that is beyond human limits and boundaries, and we believe there is clear potential for artificial intelligence breakthroughs in the pathology setting. In this Review, we discuss advancements in digital slide-based image diagnosis for cancer along with some challenges and opportunities for artificial intelligence in digital pathology.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30154-8

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 61 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Niazi, 2018, Automated T1 bladder risk stratification based on depth of lamina propria invasion from H&E tissue biopsies: a deep learning approach, SPIE Medical Imaging, 10581, 105810H1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Niazi, M. K. K., Parwani, A. V., & Gurcan, M. N.
Affiliations
  • Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Niazi, Muhammad Khalid Khan
Venue
The Lancet Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
20
Issue
5
Pages
e253-e261
ISSN
1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2943370629
Cited by
1,232
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 164 · 2025: 204 · 2024: 236 · 2023: 209 · 2022: 175 · 2021: 138 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 12
FWCI
6.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute and The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center Intramural Research (R01CA134451)
  • Metin N Gurcan (co-principal investigator) and Gerard Lozanski (U24CA199374)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
digital pathology, artificial intelligence, whole slide imaging, computer-aided diagnosis, cancer diagnosis
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Microscopy, Neoplasms, Pathology, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Reproducibility of Results, Workflow

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review