163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36692113)
1. A whole-slide imaging based workflow reduces the reading time of pathologists.
Baidoshvili A; Khacheishvili M; van der Laak JAWM; van Diest PJ
Pathol Int; 2023 Mar; 73(3):127-134. PubMed ID: 36692113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Whole slide imaging equivalency and efficiency study: experience at a large academic center.
Hanna MG; Reuter VE; Hameed MR; Tan LK; Chiang S; Sigel C; Hollmann T; Giri D; Samboy J; Moradel C; Rosado A; Otilano JR; England C; Corsale L; Stamelos E; Yagi Y; Schüffler PJ; Fuchs T; Klimstra DS; Sirintrapun SJ
Mod Pathol; 2019 Jul; 32(7):916-928. PubMed ID: 30778169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. What is Essential is (No More) Invisible to the Eyes: The Introduction of BlocDoc in the Digital Pathology Workflow.
L'Imperio V; Gibilisco F; Fraggetta F
J Pathol Inform; 2021; 12():32. PubMed ID: 34760329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Digital Whole Slide Imaging Compared With Light Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology.
Borowsky AD; Glassy EF; Wallace WD; Kallichanda NS; Behling CA; Miller DV; Oswal HN; Feddersen RM; Bakhtar OR; Mendoza AE; Molden DP; Saffer HL; Wixom CR; Albro JE; Cessna MH; Hall BJ; Lloyd IE; Bishop JW; Darrow MA; Gui D; Jen KY; Walby JAS; Bauer SM; Cortez DA; Gandhi P; Rodgers MM; Rodriguez RA; Martin DR; McConnell TG; Reynolds SJ; Spigel JH; Stepenaskie SA; Viktorova E; Magari R; Wharton KA; Qiu J; Bauer TW
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2020 Oct; 144(10):1245-1253. PubMed ID: 32057275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of four different displays for identification of select pathologic features extracted from whole slide images of surgical pathology cases.
Shaker N; Shilo K; Esnakula AK; Shafi S; Challa B; Patel A; Kellough DA; Hammond S; Javaid S; Satturwar S; Yearsley MM; Li Z; Limbach AL; Lujan G; Parwani AV
Pathol Res Pract; 2023 Nov; 251():154843. PubMed ID: 37826873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mouse cursor movement and eye tracking data as an indicator of pathologists' attention when viewing digital whole slide images.
Raghunath V; Braxton MO; Gagnon SA; Brunyé TT; Allison KH; Reisch LM; Weaver DL; Elmore JG; Shapiro LG
J Pathol Inform; 2012; 3():43. PubMed ID: 23372984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Diagnostic Accuracy of Virtual Pathology vs Traditional Microscopy in a Large Dermatopathology Study.
Kent MN; Olsen TG; Feeser TA; Tesno KC; Moad JC; Conroy MP; Kendrick MJ; Stephenson SR; Murchland MR; Khan AU; Peacock EA; Brumfiel A; Bottomley MA
JAMA Dermatol; 2017 Dec; 153(12):1285-1291. PubMed ID: 29049424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Being fully digital: perspective of a Dutch academic pathology laboratory.
Stathonikos N; Nguyen TQ; Spoto CP; Verdaasdonk MAM; van Diest PJ
Histopathology; 2019 Nov; 75(5):621-635. PubMed ID: 31301690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Whole slide images as a platform for initial diagnostics in histopathology in a medium-sized routine laboratory.
Al-Janabi S; Huisman A; Nap M; Clarijs R; van Diest PJ
J Clin Pathol; 2012 Dec; 65(12):1107-11. PubMed ID: 23093511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Implementation of large-scale routine diagnostics using whole slide imaging in Sweden: Digital pathology experiences 2006-2013.
Thorstenson S; Molin J; Lundström C
J Pathol Inform; 2014; 5(1):14. PubMed ID: 24843825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Validation of whole slide imaging for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology.
Bauer TW; Schoenfield L; Slaw RJ; Yerian L; Sun Z; Henricks WH
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2013 Apr; 137(4):518-24. PubMed ID: 23323732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An analysis of pathologists' viewing processes as they diagnose whole slide digital images.
Ghezloo F; Wang PC; Kerr KF; Brunyé TT; Drew T; Chang OH; Reisch LM; Shapiro LG; Elmore JG
J Pathol Inform; 2022; 13():100104. PubMed ID: 36268085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Validation of Whole Slide Imaging for primary surgical pathology diagnosis of prostate biopsies.
Rao V; Subramanian P; Sali AP; Menon S; Desai SB
Indian J Pathol Microbiol; 2021; 64(1):78-83. PubMed ID: 33433413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluating the benefits of digital pathology implementation: time savings in laboratory logistics.
Baidoshvili A; Bucur A; van Leeuwen J; van der Laak J; Kluin P; van Diest PJ
Histopathology; 2018 Nov; 73(5):784-794. PubMed ID: 29924891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Digitized whole slides for breast pathology interpretation: current practices and perceptions.
Onega T; Weaver D; Geller B; Oster N; Tosteson AN; Carney PA; Nelson H; Allison KH; O'Malley FP; Schnitt SJ; Elmore JG
J Digit Imaging; 2014 Oct; 27(5):642-8. PubMed ID: 24682769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Diagnostic Assessment of Deep Learning Algorithms for Detection of Lymph Node Metastases in Women With Breast Cancer.
Ehteshami Bejnordi B; Veta M; Johannes van Diest P; van Ginneken B; Karssemeijer N; Litjens G; van der Laak JAWM; ; Hermsen M; Manson QF; Balkenhol M; Geessink O; Stathonikos N; van Dijk MC; Bult P; Beca F; Beck AH; Wang D; Khosla A; Gargeya R; Irshad H; Zhong A; Dou Q; Li Q; Chen H; Lin HJ; Heng PA; Haß C; Bruni E; Wong Q; Halici U; Öner MÜ; Cetin-Atalay R; Berseth M; Khvatkov V; Vylegzhanin A; Kraus O; Shaban M; Rajpoot N; Awan R; Sirinukunwattana K; Qaiser T; Tsang YW; Tellez D; Annuscheit J; Hufnagl P; Valkonen M; Kartasalo K; Latonen L; Ruusuvuori P; Liimatainen K; Albarqouni S; Mungal B; George A; Demirci S; Navab N; Watanabe S; Seno S; Takenaka Y; Matsuda H; Ahmady Phoulady H; Kovalev V; Kalinovsky A; Liauchuk V; Bueno G; Fernandez-Carrobles MM; Serrano I; Deniz O; Racoceanu D; Venâncio R
JAMA; 2017 Dec; 318(22):2199-2210. PubMed ID: 29234806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical Validation of Artificial Intelligence-Augmented Pathology Diagnosis Demonstrates Significant Gains in Diagnostic Accuracy in Prostate Cancer Detection.
Raciti P; Sue J; Retamero JA; Ceballos R; Godrich R; Kunz JD; Casson A; Thiagarajan D; Ebrahimzadeh Z; Viret J; Lee D; Schüffler PJ; DeMuth G; Gulturk E; Kanan C; Rothrock B; Reis-Filho J; Klimstra DS; Reuter V; Fuchs TJ
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2023 Oct; 147(10):1178-1185. PubMed ID: 36538386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of Digital Pathologic Analysis vs Traditional Microscopy in the Interpretation of Melanocytic Lesions.
Onega T; Barnhill RL; Piepkorn MW; Longton GM; Elder DE; Weinstock MA; Knezevich SR; Reisch LM; Carney PA; Nelson HD; Radick AC; Elmore JG
JAMA Dermatol; 2018 Oct; 154(10):1159-1166. PubMed ID: 30140929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Routine Digital Pathology Workflow: The Catania Experience.
Fraggetta F; Garozzo S; Zannoni GF; Pantanowitz L; Rossi ED
J Pathol Inform; 2017; 8():51. PubMed ID: 29416914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Diagnostic concordance between traditional and digital workflows. A study on 1427 prostate biopsies.
Torresani E; Gentilini MA; Grassi S; Cima L; Pedrolli I; Cai T; Puglisi M; Vattovani V; Guadin B; Brunelli M; Doglioni C; Barbareschi M
Pathologica; 2023 Aug; 115(4):221-226. PubMed ID: 37711038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
