This is a multi-center, prospective, self-controlled, diagnostic accuracy comparative study of Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic System for Surgical Neuropathology. The investigators will compare the diagnostic efficiency of Artificial Intelligence with that of practicing pathologists, and suppose that the diagnostic efficiency of artificial intelligence in prospective clinical data is no less than that of pathologists.
In this study, 141 patients will be recruited. After being enrolled, the patients will accept surgery and specimens for pathological analysis will be taken according to the routine treatment process. The histopathologic slides will then be digitized by a whole-slide scanner. The images will be reviewed by gold standard committee for evaluation of ground truth. And then be separately diagnosed by Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic System and practicing pathologists. So the investigators can compare the diagnostic efficiency of Artificial Intelligence with that of pathologists, thus understand the gap between artificial intelligence and actual clinical practice.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
141
The investigators will use the Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic System to review the H＆E stained slide of each patient and then report the classification of the tumor on a 10-type scale.
The ordinary pathologist will review the H＆E stained slide of each patient(without additional informations such as: Immunohistochemistry et al.) and then report the classification of the tumor on a 10-type scale only bases on the slide images
Firstly, the two expert pathologist(\>=10 years of experience) will review the H＆E stained slide of each patient on their own (with additional informations such as: Immunohistochemistry et al.) and then report the classification of the tumor on a 10-type scale.If they report the same opinion, that opinion will perform as the ground truth; while if their opinion clash with each other, the expert pathologist(\>=15 years of experience) will get involved and the agreement of three experts will perform as the ground truth
Diagnostic Accuracy of Study Arms
The number of correctly diagnosed participants by study arms divided by the total number of participants
Time frame: 1 week after the last patient's diagnosis is completed
Sensitivity and specificity of Study Arms
Sensitivity and specificity of study arms for each type calculated by 2x2 tables
Time frame: 1 week after the last patient's diagnosis is completed
Spearman Coefficient of Study Arms related to Gold Standard
Spearman Correlation Analysis between Study Arms and Gold Standard
Time frame: 1 week after the last patient's diagnosis is completed
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.