窗口大小对病理学家在数字病理设置中搜索稀有元素的影响。

Alana Lopes, Sean Rasmussen, Bojana Djordjevic, Jose A Gomez, Maria Florencia Mora, Anurag Sharma, Joanna C Walsh, Bret Wehrli, Aaron D Ward, Matthew J Cecchini
{"title":"窗口大小对病理学家在数字病理设置中搜索稀有元素的影响。","authors":"Alana Lopes, Sean Rasmussen, Bojana Djordjevic, Jose A Gomez, Maria Florencia Mora, Anurag Sharma, Joanna C Walsh, Bret Wehrli, Aaron D Ward, Matthew J Cecchini","doi":"10.5858/arpa.2024-0378-OA","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>Digital pathology requires pathologists to assess tissue digitally rather than on an analog microscope, which has been the mainstay tool for tissue assessment for more than a century. The impact of different digital interaction configurations on pathologists' performance is not well understood. This work focuses on the impact of the display window size for diagnostic assessment.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To determine the effect of digital image viewer window size on pathologists' diagnostic performance when searching for tumors in lymph nodes while under a time limit.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>Six pathologists assessed 8 breast lymph node whole slide images using 4 digital image viewer window sizes (8, 14, 24, and 32 inches) for tumors in lymph nodes while under a time limit. Eye-gaze data were collected. Pathologists were subsequently asked to rate their preference of window sizes.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>The fraction of window not covered with foveated vision was significantly associated with window size ranging from 43% for 32 inches to 5% for 8 inches (P < .001). There was no statistically significant relationship between the number of false negatives or assessment time and window size (P = .21 and P = .28, respectively). The distance traversed per panning instance ranged from 301 pixels for 32-inch to 193 pixels for 8-inch windows (P = .002). All pathologists preferred the largest window size as it provided more context for diagnostic assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>Window size does not significantly affect pathologists' diagnostic performance when searching for tumors in lymph nodes. However, pathologists adapted their slide navigation approach to accommodate the amount of context the window size permitted.</p>","PeriodicalId":93883,"journal":{"name":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of Window Size on Pathologists' Search for Rare Elements in a Digital Pathology Setting.\",\"authors\":\"Alana Lopes, Sean Rasmussen, Bojana Djordjevic, Jose A Gomez, Maria Florencia Mora, Anurag Sharma, Joanna C Walsh, Bret Wehrli, Aaron D Ward, Matthew J Cecchini\",\"doi\":\"10.5858/arpa.2024-0378-OA\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>Digital pathology requires pathologists to assess tissue digitally rather than on an analog microscope, which has been the mainstay tool for tissue assessment for more than a century. The impact of different digital interaction configurations on pathologists' performance is not well understood. This work focuses on the impact of the display window size for diagnostic assessment.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To determine the effect of digital image viewer window size on pathologists' diagnostic performance when searching for tumors in lymph nodes while under a time limit.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>Six pathologists assessed 8 breast lymph node whole slide images using 4 digital image viewer window sizes (8, 14, 24, and 32 inches) for tumors in lymph nodes while under a time limit. Eye-gaze data were collected. Pathologists were subsequently asked to rate their preference of window sizes.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>The fraction of window not covered with foveated vision was significantly associated with window size ranging from 43% for 32 inches to 5% for 8 inches (P < .001). There was no statistically significant relationship between the number of false negatives or assessment time and window size (P = .21 and P = .28, respectively). The distance traversed per panning instance ranged from 301 pixels for 32-inch to 193 pixels for 8-inch windows (P = .002). All pathologists preferred the largest window size as it provided more context for diagnostic assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>Window size does not significantly affect pathologists' diagnostic performance when searching for tumors in lymph nodes. However, pathologists adapted their slide navigation approach to accommodate the amount of context the window size permitted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2024-0378-OA\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2024-0378-OA","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

上下文。数字病理学要求病理学家以数字方式评估组织,而不是在模拟显微镜上,一个多世纪以来,模拟显微镜一直是组织评估的主要工具。不同数字交互配置对病理学家表现的影响尚不清楚。本工作主要研究显示窗口大小对诊断评估的影响。-:确定数字图像查看器窗口大小对病理学家在一定时间内搜索淋巴结肿瘤诊断性能的影响。-: 6名病理学家在限定时间内使用4种数字图像查看器窗口尺寸(8、14、24和32英寸)评估8张乳腺淋巴结全切片图像。收集眼球注视数据。病理学家随后被要求评价他们对窗口大小的偏好。-:未被注视视力覆盖的窗户比例与窗户尺寸显著相关,范围从32英寸的43%到8英寸的5% (P < 0.001)。假阴性数或评估时间与窗口大小之间无统计学意义(P = 0.21和P = 0.28)。每个平移实例遍历的距离从32英寸的301像素到8英寸窗口的193像素不等(P = 0.002)。所有病理学家都倾向于选择最大的窗口大小,因为它为诊断评估提供了更多的背景。-:窗口大小对病理学家寻找淋巴结肿瘤的诊断效果无显著影响。然而,病理学家调整了他们的幻灯片导航方法,以适应窗口大小允许的上下文数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Effect of Window Size on Pathologists' Search for Rare Elements in a Digital Pathology Setting.

Context.—: Digital pathology requires pathologists to assess tissue digitally rather than on an analog microscope, which has been the mainstay tool for tissue assessment for more than a century. The impact of different digital interaction configurations on pathologists' performance is not well understood. This work focuses on the impact of the display window size for diagnostic assessment.

Objective.—: To determine the effect of digital image viewer window size on pathologists' diagnostic performance when searching for tumors in lymph nodes while under a time limit.

Design.—: Six pathologists assessed 8 breast lymph node whole slide images using 4 digital image viewer window sizes (8, 14, 24, and 32 inches) for tumors in lymph nodes while under a time limit. Eye-gaze data were collected. Pathologists were subsequently asked to rate their preference of window sizes.

Results.—: The fraction of window not covered with foveated vision was significantly associated with window size ranging from 43% for 32 inches to 5% for 8 inches (P < .001). There was no statistically significant relationship between the number of false negatives or assessment time and window size (P = .21 and P = .28, respectively). The distance traversed per panning instance ranged from 301 pixels for 32-inch to 193 pixels for 8-inch windows (P = .002). All pathologists preferred the largest window size as it provided more context for diagnostic assessment.

Conclusions.—: Window size does not significantly affect pathologists' diagnostic performance when searching for tumors in lymph nodes. However, pathologists adapted their slide navigation approach to accommodate the amount of context the window size permitted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Development of a Scoring Rubric Assessing Medical Students' Explanations of Pathology Reports. Localized Urinary Bladder Amyloidosis as Urothelial Cancer Mimicker: A Case Series Examining Cystoscopic, Histologic, and Cytologic Findings. Laboratory Considerations for Releasing Next-Generation Sequencing Data to Patients. Genetic Landscape and Its Prognostic Impact in Children With Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis. ZMIZ1::ABL1 Fusion: An Uncommon Molecular Event With Clinical Implications in Pediatric Cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1