The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Digital Pathology: Advantages, Limitations and Emerging Perspectives
Open accessAbstract
Digital pathology is on the verge of becoming a mainstream option for routine diagnostics. Faster whole slide image scanning has paved the way for this development, but implementation on a large scale is challenging on technical, logistical, and financial levels. Comparative studies have published reassuring data on safety and feasibility, but implementation experiences highlight the need for training and the knowledge of pitfalls. Up to half of the pathologists are reluctant to sign out reports on only digital slides and are concerned about reporting without the tool that has represented their profession since its beginning. Guidelines by international pathology organizations aim to safeguard histology in the digital realm, from image acquisition over the setup of work-stations to long-term image archiving, but must be considered a starting point only. Cost-efficiency analyses and occupational health issues need to be addressed comprehensively. Image analysis is blended into the traditional work-flow, and the approval of artificial intelligence for routine diagnostics starts to challenge human evaluation as the gold standard. Here we discuss experiences from past digital pathology implementations, future possibilities through the addition of artificial intelligence, technical and occupational health challenges, and possible changes to the pathologist’s profession.
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
Ehteshami Bejnordi, B., Veta, M., Johannes van Diest, P., van Ginneken, B., Karssemeijer, N., Litjens, G., van der Laak, J. A. W. M., and the CAMELYON16 Consortium, Hermsen, M., Manson, Q. F., et al. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14585 · Cited by 3,293 · cited 1×
“Examples include the Grand Challenge on BreAst Cancer Histology (BACH) [65], and the Cancer Metastases in Lymph Nodes Challenge [66].”
BackgroundCoudray, N., Ocampo, P. S., Sakellaropoulos, T., Narula, N., Snuderl, M., Fenyö, D., Moreira, A. L., Razavian, N., & Tsirigos, A. (2018) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0177-5 · Cited by 2,930
Clinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images
Campanella, G., Hanna, M. G., Geneslaw, L., Miraflor, A., Werneck Krauss Silva, V., Busam, K. J., Brogi, E., Reuter, V. E., Klimstra, D. S., & Fuchs, T. J. (2019) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0508-1 · Cited by 2,799
Pagès, F., Mlecnik, B., Marliot, F., Bindea, G., Ou, F.-S., Bifulco, C., Lugli, A., Zlobec, I., Rau, T. T., Berger, M. D., et al. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30789-x · Cited by 2,075
Mitosis Detection in Breast Cancer Histology Images with Deep Neural Networks
Cireşan, D. C., Giusti, A., Gambardella, L. M., & Schmidhuber, J. (2013) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40763-5_51 · Cited by 1,536
Benjamens, S., Dhunnoo, P., & Meskó, B. (2020) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-020-00324-0 · Cited by 1,215
Evaluating the Visualization of What a Deep Neural Network Has Learned
Samek, W., Binder, A., Montavon, G., Lapuschkin, S., & Muller, K.-R. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2016.2599820 · Cited by 1,164
Machine Learning Methods for Histopathological Image Analysis
Komura, D., & Ishikawa, S. (2018) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2018.01.001 · Cited by 937
Interactive machine learning for health informatics: when do we need the human-in-the-loop?
Holzinger, A. (2016) · Brain Informatics · doi:10.1007/s40708-016-0042-6 · Cited by 906
Computer Vision Syndrome: A Review
Blehm, C., Vishnu, S., Khattak, A., Mitra, S., & Yee, R. W. (2005) · Survey of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2005.02.008 · Cited by 860
Metadata
- Authors
- Jahn, S. W., Plass, M., & Moinfar, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Medicine
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2020-11-18
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3697
- ISSN
- 2077-0383 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3100887207
- Cited by
- 348
- References
- 62
- FWCI
- 12.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Advantages, Limitations and Emerging Perspectives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/jcm9113697
- The paper
- Jahn, S. W., Plass, M., & Moinfar, F. (2020). Digital Pathology: Advantages, Limitations and Emerging Perspectives. Journal of Clinical Medicine. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9113697
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.
