WeChat Mini Program
Old Version Features

Evaluating Pathologist Practices in Peripheral Blood Smear Review: A Comprehensive Practice Survey

Margaret Moore,Xueyan Chen,Sam Sadigh,Robert Seifert, Andres E. Mindiola Romero, Olga Pozdnyakova,Elizabeth L. Courville

American journal of clinical pathology(2025)

Univ Virginia | Translational Science and Therapeutics Division | Harvard Med Sch | Univ Florida | Univ New Mexico | Hosp Univ Penn

Cited 0|Views7
Abstract
Objectives Widely accepted standardized criteria for peripheral blood (PB) smear review do not exist. The aim of this study was to collect data regarding PB smear review practices across multiple institutions, with a focus on pathologist review.Methods A 23-question survey was developed by members of the Society for Hematopathology (SH) Education Committee and distributed to SH members. The survey included questions on practice environment and PB smear review practices, including trainee involvement.Results Of 725 members contacted, 137 (19%) completed the entire survey. Over half of practices examined 5 to 20 smears a day. All respondents reported using complete blood count/differential leukocyte count data and clinical history as part of smear review. The reported proportion of laboratory-initiated vs clinician-requested reviews varied across respondents. Clinician-requested smear reviews were more likely to be billed and issued as a separate pathology report. Glass slide review (as opposed to digital microscopy) was used by most respondents. All respondents affirmed that PB smear review is an essential component of pathology training programs. Numerous free-text comments were submitted by respondents regarding their own experiences with PB smear review and suggested improvements.Conclusions This survey elucidated the spectrum of practice patterns for pathologist review of blood smears and identified potential areas for process improvement.
More
Translated text
Key words
peripheral smear,pathologist,blood smear,blood film,practice survey,hematopathology fellowship,pathology resident
求助PDF
上传PDF
Bibtex
AI Read Science
AI Summary
AI Summary is the key point extracted automatically understanding the full text of the paper, including the background, methods, results, conclusions, icons and other key content, so that you can get the outline of the paper at a glance.
Example
Background
Key content
Introduction
Methods
Results
Related work
Fund
Key content
  • Pretraining has recently greatly promoted the development of natural language processing (NLP)
  • We show that M6 outperforms the baselines in multimodal downstream tasks, and the large M6 with 10 parameters can reach a better performance
  • We propose a method called M6 that is able to process information of multiple modalities and perform both single-modal and cross-modal understanding and generation
  • The model is scaled to large model with 10 billion parameters with sophisticated deployment, and the 10 -parameter M6-large is the largest pretrained model in Chinese
  • Experimental results show that our proposed M6 outperforms the baseline in a number of downstream tasks concerning both single modality and multiple modalities We will continue the pretraining of extremely large models by increasing data to explore the limit of its performance
Upload PDF to Generate Summary
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Related Papers
Gl Gulati, M Alomari, W Kochar,R Schwarting
2002

被引用16 | 浏览

2005

被引用338 | 浏览

Data Disclaimer
The page data are from open Internet sources, cooperative publishers and automatic analysis results through AI technology. We do not make any commitments and guarantees for the validity, accuracy, correctness, reliability, completeness and timeliness of the page data. If you have any questions, please contact us by email: report@aminer.cn
Chat Paper
Summary is being generated by the instructions you defined