ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
Digital pathology platforms with integrated AI algorithms: a structured landscape analysis and recommendations for clinical implementation.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pathology is undergoing a fundamental change as slide-based diagnostics transition toward digital workflows. Advances in whole slide imaging, data management, and computational analysis have created the basis for integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into diagnostic routines. However, the growing number of commercial digital pathology platforms poses challenges for selecting clinically suitable and regulatory-compliant solutions. A structured multi-source approach was conducted to identify commercially available digital pathology platforms. Vendor and sponsor lists from major digital pathology congresses, the Digital Pathology Association vendor catalog, and a structured web search were performed. Predefined eligibility criteria were applied to identify the relevant platforms. Suitable parameters were defined and validated by pathology and IT experts to then compare the included platforms, supplemented by direct vendor communication for selected implementation-related parameters, such as support and pricing modalities. Fourteen platforms met the eligibility criteria. Moderate variation was observed across platforms, particularly regarding deployment models, whole slide imaging (WSI) format compatibility, the integration of external AI algorithms, and reported pricing modalities. Based on the market analysis, six practical recommendations were derived to guide platform selection in routine diagnostic workflows. Pathology institutes are under increasing pressure to digitalize their workflows due to rising work volumes and workforce shortages. However, the market for digital pathology solutions is highly dynamic. To ensure sustainable acquisition decisions, the regulatory framework and the site-specific technical infrastructure must be considered. Furthermore, platforms that support the integration of third-party algorithms and offer broad compatibility with whole-slide image formats help to maintain long-term flexibility with regard to future algorithmic developments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41870613What 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.