ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2026
Comparative analysis of whole-slide scanner tissue detection algorithms: Implications for scan area, scan time, and file size in high-volume digital pathology workflows.
Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2026. 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.
- Guidance for laboratory implementation, governance and continuous assurance of artificial intelligence in histopathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Deployment of AI-driven automated quality control of whole-slide images in a large tertiary cancer center.Journal of pathology informatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Whole-slide imaging (WSI) systems differ in their tissue detection algorithms, which can alter the scanned area, scan time, and file size. In high-volume labs, these differences translate into tangible workflow and cost implications. Digital pathology workflows require high-resolution digitization of glass slides that can be achieved by using specialized WSI systems. Whole-slide scanners vary in technical features that affect magnification, throughput, image quality, and resulting file formats and sizes. Variations in scan area can profoundly impact operational efficiency. Scan area, determined by scanner-specific tissue detection algorithms, directly influences scan time, which in turn affects workflow and staff planning as well as file size, a major expense in storage and data management. This study compares tissue detection patterns across four commercial whole-slide scanner models to evaluate their effects on these metrics, using classical computer vision to establish perimeter-based benchmarks. Design: 260 routine diagnostic glass slides (balanced by hematoxylin and eosin-stained and immunohistochemistry slide types and biopsy/resection tissue types) were scanned on 8 whole-slide scanners representing 4 different commercial manufacturers (designated scanner models A-D). A classical computer vision pipeline was used to delineate the minimal tissue perimeter on each slide, which served as the reference area. Scanner area, scan time, and file size were extracted from the WSI metadata. Absolute and relative area differences were calculated, and linear regression quantified the relationship between area and downstream metrics. One-way ANOVA was used to test the differences between scanner models, stratified by slide and tissue types. Results: All 260 slides were successfully scanned, yielding 1040 WSIs. Scanner models A and B modestly overestimated tissue area with a median of 76 mm Conclusion: Tissue detection algorithms vary significantly across scanner models, affecting scan area estimates and downstream performance. Whereas not the sole determinant of throughput, scan area detection is a foundational parameter that impacts time and storage costs. In high-throughput digital pathology environments, understanding these algorithmic differences is critical for informed scanner selection recommendations and workflow optimization.
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.