Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40688394›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2025

Enhancing diagnostic innovation by leveraging the co-creation approach.

Jochen K Lennerz, Alexandra Farfsing, Tim-Rasmus Kiehl, Sven Perner, Joost van Duuren, Marleen Christ, Jan W Farfsing

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jochen K LennerzBoston Gene, Waltham, MA, USA.
Alexandra FarfsingRoche Diagnostics Deutschland GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Tim-Rasmus KiehlCharité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Medical Informatics, Berlin, Germany.
Sven PernerPATHORA Institut für Pathologie und Gewebemedizin, Gerhard-Kindler-Str., 1772770 Reutlingen, Germany.
Joost van DuurenRoche Diagnostics Deutschland GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Marleen ChristRoche Diagnostics Deutschland GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Jan W FarfsingRoche Diagnostics Deutschland GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital innovation in precision diagnostics requires addressing complex challenges, such as implementation, adoption, equity, and sustainability. This study introduces a co-creation framework that leverages the pre-competitive space to drive collaborative innovation in personalized diagnostics. Over 5 years, a multidisciplinary community of stakeholders from computational pathology, oncology, genetics, digital medicine, and industry engaged in design-thinking workshops to identify unmet medical needs and co-develop solutions. These efforts led to 15 pilot projects, with 7 successfully implemented, including an automated lab system enhancing workflow efficiency. The co-creation approach fostered strategic alignment, community building, and integration of diverse perspectives, resulting in tangible outputs (datasets, publications, and resources) and intangible benefits (networking, market insight). This framework demonstrates how collaborative ecosystems accelerate diagnostic innovations and offer a scalable model for advancing personalized healthcare. Co-creation addresses interdisciplinary silos, promotes patient-centered solutions, and adapts to evolving regulatory landscapes, making it a catalyst for impactful healthcare transformation.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceAutomationBiomarkersCo-creationCo-innovationDigitizationPre-competitive space

Identifiers

PMID40688394
PMCPMC12274866

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.