Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Pathologists' first opinions on barriers and facilitators of computational pathology adoption in oncological pathology: an international study.
Swillens, Julie E M; Nagtegaal, Iris D; Engels, Sam; Lugli, Alessandro; Hermens, Rosella P M G; van der Laak, Jeroen A W M.
Afiliação
  • Swillens JEM; Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Julie.Swillens@radboudumc.nl.
  • Nagtegaal ID; Department of Pathology, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences (RIMLS), Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Engels S; Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Lugli A; Institute of Pathology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Hermens RPMG; Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • van der Laak JAWM; Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Oncogene ; 42(38): 2816-2827, 2023 09.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37587332
ABSTRACT
Computational pathology (CPath) algorithms detect, segment or classify cancer in whole slide images, approaching or even exceeding the accuracy of pathologists. Challenges have to be overcome before these algorithms can be used in practice. We therefore aim to explore international perspectives on the future role of CPath in oncological pathology by focusing on opinions and first experiences regarding barriers and facilitators. We conducted an international explorative eSurvey and semi-structured interviews with pathologists utilizing an implementation framework to classify potential influencing factors. The eSurvey results showed remarkable variation in opinions regarding attitude, understandability and validation of CPath. Interview results showed that barriers focused on the quality of available evidence, while most facilitators concerned strengths of CPath. A lack of consensus was present for multiple factors, such as the determination of sufficient validation using CPath, the preferred function of CPath within the digital workflow and the timing of CPath introduction in pathology education. The diversity in opinions illustrates variety in influencing factors in CPath adoption. A next step would be to quantitatively determine important factors for adoption and initiate validation studies. Both should include clear case descriptions and be conducted among a more homogenous panel of pathologists based on sub specialization.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Patologistas / Oncologia Tipo de estudo: Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Patologistas / Oncologia Tipo de estudo: Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article