The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Digital pathology: current status and future perspectives
Abstract
Al‐Janabi S, Huisman A & Van Diest P J (2012) Histopathology 61, 1–9 Digital pathology: current status and future perspectives During the last decade pathology has benefited from the rapid progress of image digitizing technology. The improvement in this technology had led to the creation of slide scanners which are able to produce whole slide images (WSI) which can be explored by image viewers in a way comparable to the conventional microscope. The file size of the WSI ranges from a few megabytes to several gigabytes, leading to challenges in the area of image storage and management when they will be used routinely in daily clinical practice. Digital slides are used in pathology for education, diagnostic purposes (clinicopathological meetings, consultations, revisions, slide panels and, increasingly, for upfront clinical diagnostics) and archiving. As an alternative to conventional slides, WSI are generally well accepted, especially in education, where they are available to a large number of students with the full possibilities of annotations without the problem of variation between serial sections. Image processing techniques can also be applied to WSI, providing pathologists with tools assisting in the diagnosis‐making process. This paper will highlight the current status of digital pathology applications and its impact on the field of 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: Prospects for the future
Weinstein, R. S., Graham, A. R., Richter, L. C., Barker, G. P., Krupinski, E. A., Lopez, A. M., Erps, K. A., Bhattacharyya, A. K., Yagi, Y., & Gilbertson, J. R. (2009) · Human Pathology · doi:10.1016/j.humpath.2009.04.006 · Cited by 380
Cited by
Breast Cancer Histopathology Image Analysis: A Review
Veta, M., Pluim, J. P. W., van Diest, P. J., & Viergever, M. A. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2014.2303852 · Cited by 696
Self-citationA Practical Guide to Whole Slide Imaging: A White Paper From the Digital Pathology Association
Zarella, M. D., Bowman;, D., Aeffner, F., Farahani, N., Xthona;, A., Absar, S. F., Parwani, A., Bui, M., & Hartman, D. J. (2019) · Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.5858/arpa.2018-0343-ra · Cited by 404
Gupta, R. K., Lucas, S. B., Fielding, K. L., & Lawn, S. D. (2015) · AIDS · doi:10.1097/qad.0000000000000802 · Cited by 371
Pantanowitz, L., Sharma, A., Carter, A. B., Kurc, T., Sussman, A., & Saltz, J. (2018) · Journal of Pathology Informatics · doi:10.4103/jpi.jpi_69_18 · Cited by 282
Olsen, T. G., Jackson, B. H., Feeser, T. A., Kent, M. N., Moad, J. C., Krishnamurthy, S., Lunsford, D. D., & Soans, R. E. (2018) · Journal of Pathology Informatics · doi:10.4103/jpi.jpi_31_18 · Cited by 119
Metadata
- Authors
- Al‐Janabi, S., Huisman, A., & Van Diest, P. J.
- Venue
- Histopathology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-04-11
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-9
- ISSN
- 0309-0167 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2559
- OpenAlex
- W1548827537
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Digital pathology: current status and future perspectives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2011.03814.x
- The paper
- Al‐Janabi, S., Huisman, A., & Van Diest, P. J. (2012). Digital pathology: current status and future perspectives. Histopathology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2011.03814.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.