Lopes Alana, Rasmussen Sean, Djordjevic Bojana, Gomez Jose A, Mora Maria Florencia, Sharma Anurag, Walsh Joanna C, Wehrli Bret, Ward Aaron D, Cecchini Matthew J
From the Department of Medical Biophysics (Lopes, Ward) and Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry (Rasmussen, Djordjevic, Gomez, Mora, Sharma, Walsh, Wehrli, Cecchini), and the Departments of Pathology (Cecchini), and Oncology (Ward), Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
the Gerald C. Baines Centre, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada (Lopes, Ward).
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2025 Jan 2. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2024-0378-OA.
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.
数字病理学要求病理学家通过数字方式而非传统显微镜来评估组织,传统显微镜在一个多世纪以来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工作表现的影响尚未得到充分理解。本研究聚焦于显示窗口大小对诊断评估的影响。
确定在限时条件下,数字图像查看器窗口大小对病理学家在淋巴结中查找肿瘤时诊断性能的影响。
六名病理学家在限时条件下,使用4种数字图像查看器窗口大小(8英寸、14英寸、24英寸和32英寸)评估8张乳腺淋巴结全切片图像以查找淋巴结中的肿瘤。收集眼动数据。随后要求病理学家对窗口大小的偏好进行评分。
未被中心注视视野覆盖的窗口比例与窗口大小显著相关,范围从32英寸窗口的43%到8英寸窗口的5%(P <.001)。假阴性数量或评估时间与窗口大小之间无统计学显著关系(分别为P =.21和P =.28)。每次平移实例移动的距离范围从32英寸窗口的301像素到8英寸窗口的193像素(P =.002)。所有病理学家都更喜欢最大的窗口大小,因为它为诊断评估提供了更多背景信息。
在淋巴结中查找肿瘤时,窗口大小对病理学家的诊断性能没有显著影响。然而,病理学家会调整他们的玻片导航方法以适应窗口大小所允许的背景信息量。