The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Going fully digital: Perspective of a Dutch academic pathology lab
Open accessAbstract
During the last years, whole slide imaging has become more affordable and widely accepted in pathology labs. Digital slides are increasingly being used for digital archiving of routinely produced clinical slides, remote consultation and tumor boards, and quantitative image analysis for research purposes and in education. However, the implementation of a fully digital Pathology Department requires an in depth look into the suitability of digital slides for routine clinical use (the image quality of the produced digital slides and the factors that affect it) and the required infrastructure to support such use (the storage requirements and integration with lab management and hospital information systems). Optimization of digital pathology workflow requires communication between several systems, which can be facilitated by the use of open standards for digital slide storage and scanner management. Consideration of these aspects along with appropriate validation of the use of digital slides for routine pathology can pave the way for pathology departments to go "fully digital." In this paper, we summarize our experiences so far in the process of implementing a fully digital workflow at our Pathology Department and the steps that are needed to complete this process.
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
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-citationClinical Decision Support Systems for Improving Diagnostic Accuracy and Achieving Precision Medicine
Castaneda, C., Nalley, K., Mannion, C., Bhattacharyya, P., Blake, P., Pecora, A., Goy, A., & Suh, K. S. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/s13336-015-0019-3 · Cited by 408
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
Evans, A. J., Bauer, T. W., Bui, M. M., Cornish, T. C., Duncan, H., Glassy, E. F., Hipp, J., McGee, R. S., Murphy, D., Myers, C., et al. (2018) · Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.5858/arpa.2017-0496-cp · Cited by 168
Martel, A. L., Hosseinzadeh, D., Senaras, C., Zhou, Y., Yazdanpanah, A., Shojaii, R., Patterson, E. S., Madabhushi, A., & Gurcan, M. N. (2017) · Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-17-0323 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Stathonikos, N., Veta, M., Huisman, A., & van Diest, P. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Pathology Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 15
- ISSN
- 2153-3539 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1995531130
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.36
- 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: Going fully digital: Perspective of a Dutch academic pathology lab. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4103/2153-3539.114206
- The paper
- Stathonikos, N., Veta, M., Huisman, A., & van Diest, P. J. (2013). Going fully digital: Perspective of a Dutch academic pathology lab. Journal of Pathology Informatics. https://doi.org/10.4103/2153-3539.114206
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.