MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413971657 · doi:10.1093/ajcp/aqaf083

Selecting high-throughput scanners for clinical use: A multicenter institution experience

2025· article· en· W4413971657 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joice Soliman, Karen Weiser, Iman Ahmed, Charlotte Carment-Baker, Michael Hockley, Ioannis Prassas, Christine Bruce, Blaise Clarke, George M. Yousef

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThroughputMulticenter studyMedicineComputer scienceMedical physicsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and implement whole-slide imaging (WSI) scanners for a fully digital pathology workflow at the University Health Network (UHN) in Canada, a multicenter institution. The goal was to optimize clinical diagnosis, education, telepathology, consultation, and artificial intelligence (AI) applications. Given the competitive digital pathology market, a thorough assessment was conducted to select the most suitable scanners for UHN's primary diagnosis at main and satellite sites, remote teleconsultation, intraoperative consultation, and multidisciplinary education. METHODS: A request for proposal was issued to evaluate WSI scanners based on technical specifications, compatibility, previous performance, implementation strategy, operational excellence, and postinstallation support. A multidisciplinary committee scored vendors, and the highest-scoring scanners were further assessed for image accuracy, loading and offloading efficiency, scanning speed, throughput, and artifact handling. RESULTS: The UHN selected a fleet of WSI scanners with varying functionality from multiple vendors. Successful implementation included seamless integration with the image management system, laboratory information system, hospital information system, and digital storage. This transition enhanced workflow efficiency, streamlined telepathology services, and supported AI-driven applications. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high costs, WSI scanners substantially improved slide accessibility, reduced turnaround times, and enhanced workflow flexibility. Their integration supports AI advancements, facilitates second opinions, improves access to educational materials, and facilitates proficiency testing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.382 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical PathologySame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207