Literature DB >> 25128321

Effect of display resolution on time to diagnosis with virtual pathology slides in a systematic search task.

Rebecca Randell1, Thilina Ambepitiya, Claudia Mello-Thoms, Roy A Ruddle, David Brettle, Rhys G Thomas, Darren Treanor.   

Abstract

Performing diagnoses using virtual slides can take pathologists significantly longer than with glass slides, presenting a significant barrier to the use of virtual slides in routine practice. Given the benefits in pathology workflow efficiency and safety that virtual slides promise, it is important to understand reasons for this difference and identify opportunities for improvement. The effect of display resolution on time to diagnosis with virtual slides has not previously been explored. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of display resolution on time to diagnosis with virtual slides. Nine pathologists participated in a counterbalanced crossover study, viewing axillary lymph node slides on a microscope, a 23-in 2.3-megapixel single-screen display and a three-screen 11-megapixel display consisting of three 27-in displays. Time to diagnosis and time to first target were faster on the microscope than on the single and three-screen displays. There was no significant difference between the microscope and the three-screen display in time to first target, while the time taken on the single-screen display was significantly higher than that on the microscope. The results suggest that a digital pathology workstation with an increased number of pixels may make it easier to identify where cancer is located in the initial slide overview, enabling quick location of diagnostically relevant regions of interest. However, when a comprehensive, detailed search of a slide has to be made, increased resolution may not offer any additional benefit.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25128321      PMCID: PMC4305057          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-014-9726-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  14 in total

Review 1.  Virtual microscopy and digital pathology in training and education.

Authors:  Peter W Hamilton; Yinhai Wang; Stephen J McCullough
Journal:  APMIS       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.205

2.  Eye-movement study and human performance using telepathology virtual slides: implications for medical education and differences with experience.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski; Allison A Tillack; Lynne Richter; Jeffrey T Henderson; Achyut K Bhattacharyya; Katherine M Scott; Anna R Graham; Michael R Descour; John R Davis; Ronald S Weinstein
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.466

3.  The effect of image display size on observer performance an assessment of variance components.

Authors:  David Gur; Amy H Klym; Jill L King; Glenn S Maitz; Claudia Mello-Thoms; Howard E Rockette; F Leland Thaete
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Usefulness of reduced image display size in softcopy reading: evaluation of lung nodules in chest screening.

Authors:  Yuichi Bessho; Michihiro Yamaguchi; Hideki Fujita; Masami Azuma
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  Canadian licensure for the use of digital pathology for routine diagnoses: one more step toward a new era of pathology practice without borders.

Authors:  Bernard Têtu; Andrew Evans
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 5.534

6.  Virtual reality Powerwall versus conventional microscope for viewing pathology slides: an experimental comparison.

Authors:  Darren Treanor; Naomi Jordan-Owers; John Hodrien; Jason Wood; Phil Quirke; Roy A Ruddle
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 5.087

7.  A feasibility study of virtual slides in surgical pathology in China.

Authors:  Xinxia Li; Jianying Liu; Haixia Xu; Encong Gong; Michael A McNutt; Feng Li; Virginia M Anderson; Jiang Gu
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2007-09-14       Impact factor: 3.466

Review 8.  Understanding controlled trials. Crossover trials.

Authors:  B Sibbald; C Roberts
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-06-06

9.  Characterizing the development of visual search expertise in pathology residents viewing whole slide images.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski; Anna R Graham; Ronald S Weinstein
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 3.466

10.  Virtual reality microscope versus conventional microscope regarding time to diagnosis: an experimental study.

Authors:  Rebecca Randell; Roy A Ruddle; Claudia Mello-Thoms; Rhys G Thomas; Phil Quirke; Darren Treanor
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 5.087

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Teleconsulting in the time of a global pandemic: Application to anesthesia and technological considerations.

Authors:  Daniel S J Pang; Jessica M Pang; Opal-Jane Payne; Frazer M Clement; Terrie Faber
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 1.008

2.  Systematic Review of the Use of Telepathology During Intraoperative Consultation.

Authors:  Robin L Dietz; Douglas J Hartman; Liron Pantanowitz
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 2.493

3.  Display evaluation for primary diagnosis using digital pathology.

Authors:  Emily L Clarke; Craig Munnings; Bethany Williams; David Brettle; Darren Treanor
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2020-04-23

4.  DeepScope: Nonintrusive Whole Slide Saliency Annotation and Prediction from Pathologists at the Microscope.

Authors:  Andrew J Schaumberg; S Joseph Sirintrapun; Hikmat A Al-Ahmadie; Peter J Schüffler; Thomas J Fuchs
Journal:  Comput Intell Methods Bioinform Biostat (2016)       Date:  2017-10-17

5.  Evaluating whole slide imaging: A working group opportunity.

Authors:  Darren Treanor; Brandon D Gallas; Marios A Gavrielides; Stephen M Hewitt
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2015-02-24

Review 6.  Being fully digital: perspective of a Dutch academic pathology laboratory.

Authors:  Nikolas Stathonikos; Tri Q Nguyen; Clothaire P Spoto; Marina A M Verdaasdonk; Paul J van Diest
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 7.  Display Characteristics and Their Impact on Digital Pathology: A Current Review of Pathologists' Future "Microscope".

Authors:  Jacob T Abel; Peter Ouillette; Christopher L Williams; John Blau; Jerome Cheng; Keluo Yao; Winston Y Lee; Toby C Cornish; Ulysses G J Balis; David S McClintock
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2020-08-11

8.  A comparative study of input devices for digital slide navigation.

Authors:  Jesper Molin; Claes Lundström; Morten Fjeld
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2015-02-24

9.  Analysis of the impact of high-resolution monitors in digital pathology.

Authors:  Marcial García Rojo; Gloria Bueno
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2015-10-28

10.  Diagnostic time in digital pathology: A comparative study on 400 cases.

Authors:  Aleksandar Vodovnik
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2016-01-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.