Limits...
Summary of third Nordic symposium on digital pathology.

Lundström C, Waltersson M, Persson A, Treanor D - J Pathol Inform (2016)

Bottom Line: Cross-disciplinary and cross-sectorial collaboration is a key success factor for turning the promise of digital pathology into actual clinical benefits.This article is a summary of the third NDP symposium in Linkφping, Sweden.This summary also contains results from a survey on adoption and validation aspects of clinical digital pathology use.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, UK.

ABSTRACT
Cross-disciplinary and cross-sectorial collaboration is a key success factor for turning the promise of digital pathology into actual clinical benefits. The Nordic symposium on digital pathology (NDP) was created to promote knowledge exchange in this area, among stakeholders in health care, industry, and academia. This article is a summary of the third NDP symposium in Linkφping, Sweden. The Nordic experiences, including several hospitals using whole-slide imaging for substantial parts of their primary reviews, formed a fertile base for discussions among the 190 NDP attendees originating from 15 different countries. This summary also contains results from a survey on adoption and validation aspects of clinical digital pathology use.

No MeSH data available.


Perceived added safety risk from digitization (scanning and image reproduction on screen) relative to risks stemming from other parts of the diagnostic pipeline. Overall, the results point to lower perceived risk, i.e., that digitization is perceived as less error-prone
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837798&req=5

Figure 5: Perceived added safety risk from digitization (scanning and image reproduction on screen) relative to risks stemming from other parts of the diagnostic pipeline. Overall, the results point to lower perceived risk, i.e., that digitization is perceived as less error-prone

Mentions: Validation of digital pathology means controlling potential risks of the digitization step, i.e., scanning and reproduction on a computer screen. In the College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines,[6] WSI validation is defined as “a process that aims to demonstrate that the new method performs as expected for its intended use and environment prior to its application for patient care.” An important aspect is to decide on an acceptable level of risk. While it is attractive to adopt zero tolerance for errors due to digitization, this may lead to an unbalanced distribution of efforts. If the risks in other parts of the diagnostic chain are much larger than the ones in the digitization step, the mitigation and control efforts in those areas should come first. Therefore, to understand the perceived relative risk of digitization, the survey asked: “Compared with other parts of the sample preparation and diagnostic process, how big do you think the added safety risk of the digitization step is?” The results, presented in Figure 5, show that health care NDP attendees clearly consider the added risk from digitization to be smaller than risks in the diagnostic review, staining, sectioning, and grossing steps.


Summary of third Nordic symposium on digital pathology.

Lundström C, Waltersson M, Persson A, Treanor D - J Pathol Inform (2016)

Perceived added safety risk from digitization (scanning and image reproduction on screen) relative to risks stemming from other parts of the diagnostic pipeline. Overall, the results point to lower perceived risk, i.e., that digitization is perceived as less error-prone
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837798&req=5

Figure 5: Perceived added safety risk from digitization (scanning and image reproduction on screen) relative to risks stemming from other parts of the diagnostic pipeline. Overall, the results point to lower perceived risk, i.e., that digitization is perceived as less error-prone
Mentions: Validation of digital pathology means controlling potential risks of the digitization step, i.e., scanning and reproduction on a computer screen. In the College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines,[6] WSI validation is defined as “a process that aims to demonstrate that the new method performs as expected for its intended use and environment prior to its application for patient care.” An important aspect is to decide on an acceptable level of risk. While it is attractive to adopt zero tolerance for errors due to digitization, this may lead to an unbalanced distribution of efforts. If the risks in other parts of the diagnostic chain are much larger than the ones in the digitization step, the mitigation and control efforts in those areas should come first. Therefore, to understand the perceived relative risk of digitization, the survey asked: “Compared with other parts of the sample preparation and diagnostic process, how big do you think the added safety risk of the digitization step is?” The results, presented in Figure 5, show that health care NDP attendees clearly consider the added risk from digitization to be smaller than risks in the diagnostic review, staining, sectioning, and grossing steps.

Bottom Line: Cross-disciplinary and cross-sectorial collaboration is a key success factor for turning the promise of digital pathology into actual clinical benefits.This article is a summary of the third NDP symposium in Linkφping, Sweden.This summary also contains results from a survey on adoption and validation aspects of clinical digital pathology use.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, UK.

ABSTRACT
Cross-disciplinary and cross-sectorial collaboration is a key success factor for turning the promise of digital pathology into actual clinical benefits. The Nordic symposium on digital pathology (NDP) was created to promote knowledge exchange in this area, among stakeholders in health care, industry, and academia. This article is a summary of the third NDP symposium in Linkφping, Sweden. The Nordic experiences, including several hospitals using whole-slide imaging for substantial parts of their primary reviews, formed a fertile base for discussions among the 190 NDP attendees originating from 15 different countries. This summary also contains results from a survey on adoption and validation aspects of clinical digital pathology use.

No MeSH data available.