Exploring the business aspects of digital pathology, deep learning in cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer remains one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Deep learning in digital pathology has the potential to improve operational efficiency, costs, and care. We searched Web of Science, Arxiv, MedRxiv, Embase, PubMed, DBLP, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, and Cochrane databases for whole slide imaging and deep learning articles published between 2019 and 2023. The final six articles were selected from 776 articles identified through an inclusion criterion. Digital pathology services that utilize deep learning have the potential to enhance clinical workflow efficiencies and can have a positive impact on business activities. We anticipate cost reductions as deep learning technology advances and more companies enter the digital pathology ecosystem. However, the limited availability of business use cases, primarily due to publication bias, poses a challenge in medicine without clear examples to learn from. • AI in Digital Pathology: Improves cancer diagnosis accuracy and efficiency. • Cost Savings: Reduces diagnosis time and cuts costs significantly. • Adoption Barriers: High initial costs limit widespread use. • ROI: Varies • DPaaS: Cloud-based AI tools lower costs and improve diagnostics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".