ReviewVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2025
An equivalency and efficiency study for one year digital pathology for clinical routine diagnostics in an accredited tertiary academic center.
Review in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual Evaluation of Hematoxylin & Eosin via Digital Pathology Survey (VEED) Project: Results from a Non-Inferiority Study of a Tabs-Based Staining Method.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Digital slide scanning at scale: Comparison of whole slide imaging devices in a clinical setting.Journal of pathology informatics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital pathology is revolutionizing clinical diagnostics by offering enhanced efficiency, accuracy, and accessibility of pathological examinations. This study explores the implementation and validation of digital pathology in a large tertiary academic center, focusing on its gradual integration and transition into routine clinical diagnostics. In a comprehensive validation process over a 6-month period, we compared sign-out of digital and physical glass slides of a wide range of different tissue specimens and histopathological diagnoses. Key metrics such as diagnostic concordance and user satisfaction were assessed by involving the pathologists in a validation training and study phase. We measured turnaround times before and after transitioning to digital pathology to assess the impact on overall efficiency. Our results demonstrate a 99% concordance between the analog and digital reports while at the same time reducing the time to sign out a case by almost a minute, suggesting potential long-term efficiency gains. Our digital transition positively impacted our pathology workflow: Pathologists reported increased flexibility and satisfaction due to the ease of accessing and sharing digital slides. However, challenges were identified, including technical issues related to image quality and system integration. Lessons learned from this study emphasize the importance of robust training programs, adequate IT support, and ongoing evaluation to ensure successful integration. This validation study confirms that digital pathology is a viable and beneficial tool for accurate clinical routine diagnostics in large academic centers, offering insights for other institutions considering similar endeavors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.