Pathologists light level preferences using the microscope—study to guide digital pathology display use

Q2 Medicine
Charlotte Jennings , Darren Treanor , David Brettle
{"title":"Pathologists light level preferences using the microscope—study to guide digital pathology display use","authors":"Charlotte Jennings ,&nbsp;Darren Treanor ,&nbsp;David Brettle","doi":"10.1016/j.jpi.2024.100379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Currently, there is a paucity of guidelines relating to displays used for digital pathology making procurement decisions, and optimal display configuration, challenging.</p><p>Experience suggests pathologists have personal preferences for brightness when using a conventional microscope which we hypothesized could be used as a predictor for display setup.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted an online survey across six NHS hospitals, totalling 108 practicing pathologists, to capture brightness adjustment habits on both microscopes and displays.</p><p>A convenience subsample of respondents was then invited to take part in a practical task to determine microscope brightness and display luminance preferences in the normal working environment. A novel adaptation for a lightmeter was developed to directly measure the light output from the microscope eyepiece.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The survey (response rate 59% <em>n</em>=64) indicates 81% of respondents adjust the brightness on their microscope. In comparison, only 11% report adjusting their digital display. Display adjustments were more likely to be for visual comfort and ambient light compensation rather than for tissue factors, common for microscope adjustments. Part of this discrepancy relates to lack of knowledge of how to adjust displays and lack of guidance on whether this is safe; But, 66% felt that the ability to adjust the light on the display was important.</p><p>Twenty consultants took part in the practical brightness assessment. Light preferences on the microscope showed no correlation with display preferences, except where a pathologist has a markedly brighter microscope light preference. All of the preferences in this cohort were for a display luminance of &lt;500 cd/m<sup>2</sup>, with 90% preferring 350 cd/m<sup>2</sup> or less. There was no correlation between these preferences and the ambient lighting in the room.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>We conclude that microscope preferences can only be used to predict display luminance requirements where the microscope is being used at very high brightness levels. A display capable of a brightness of 500 cd/m<sup>2</sup> should be suitable for almost all pathologists with 300 cd/m<sup>2</sup> suitable for the majority. Although display luminance is not frequently changed by users, the ability to do so was felt to be important by the majority of respondents.</p><p>Further work needs to be undertaken to establish the relationship between diagnostic performance, luminance preferences, and ambient lighting levels.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37769,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pathology Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S215335392400018X/pdfft?md5=0134b221667c45b419ce808d463b9b22&pid=1-s2.0-S215335392400018X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pathology Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S215335392400018X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Currently, there is a paucity of guidelines relating to displays used for digital pathology making procurement decisions, and optimal display configuration, challenging.

Experience suggests pathologists have personal preferences for brightness when using a conventional microscope which we hypothesized could be used as a predictor for display setup.

Methods

We conducted an online survey across six NHS hospitals, totalling 108 practicing pathologists, to capture brightness adjustment habits on both microscopes and displays.

A convenience subsample of respondents was then invited to take part in a practical task to determine microscope brightness and display luminance preferences in the normal working environment. A novel adaptation for a lightmeter was developed to directly measure the light output from the microscope eyepiece.

Results

The survey (response rate 59% n=64) indicates 81% of respondents adjust the brightness on their microscope. In comparison, only 11% report adjusting their digital display. Display adjustments were more likely to be for visual comfort and ambient light compensation rather than for tissue factors, common for microscope adjustments. Part of this discrepancy relates to lack of knowledge of how to adjust displays and lack of guidance on whether this is safe; But, 66% felt that the ability to adjust the light on the display was important.

Twenty consultants took part in the practical brightness assessment. Light preferences on the microscope showed no correlation with display preferences, except where a pathologist has a markedly brighter microscope light preference. All of the preferences in this cohort were for a display luminance of <500 cd/m2, with 90% preferring 350 cd/m2 or less. There was no correlation between these preferences and the ambient lighting in the room.

Conclusions

We conclude that microscope preferences can only be used to predict display luminance requirements where the microscope is being used at very high brightness levels. A display capable of a brightness of 500 cd/m2 should be suitable for almost all pathologists with 300 cd/m2 suitable for the majority. Although display luminance is not frequently changed by users, the ability to do so was felt to be important by the majority of respondents.

Further work needs to be undertaken to establish the relationship between diagnostic performance, luminance preferences, and ambient lighting levels.

病理学家对显微镜光照度的偏好--指导数字病理显示屏使用的研究
背景目前,与数字病理学所用显示器相关的指南很少,这使得采购决定和最佳显示器配置具有挑战性。经验表明,病理学家在使用传统显微镜时对亮度有个人偏好,我们假设这可以用作显示器设置的预测因素。方法我们在六家英国国家医疗服务系统(NHS)医院开展了一项在线调查,共调查了 108 名执业病理学家,以了解他们对显微镜和显示屏亮度的调节习惯,然后邀请方便的受访者子样本参加一项实际任务,以确定他们在正常工作环境中对显微镜亮度和显示屏亮度的偏好。结果调查(回复率为 59% n=64)显示,81% 的受访者会调整显微镜的亮度。相比之下,只有 11% 的受访者表示调整过数字显示屏。显示屏的调整更可能是为了视觉舒适度和环境光补偿,而不是显微镜调整中常见的组织因素。造成这种差异的部分原因是对如何调节显示屏缺乏了解,以及缺乏关于这样做是否安全的指导;但是,66% 的人认为能够调节显示屏上的光线非常重要。对显微镜光线的偏好与对显示屏的偏好没有相关性,除非病理学家对显微镜光线有明显的偏好。该组研究人员的所有偏好都是显示亮度为 500 cd/m2,其中 90% 的人偏好 350 cd/m2 或更低的亮度。结论我们得出结论,只有在显微镜以极高亮度水平使用的情况下,显微镜偏好才可用于预测对显示亮度的要求。亮度为 500 cd/m2 的显示屏几乎适合所有病理学家,而 300 cd/m2 则适合大多数病理学家。虽然用户并不经常改变显示亮度,但大多数受访者认为改变亮度的能力非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pathology Informatics
Journal of Pathology Informatics Medicine-Pathology and Forensic Medicine
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pathology Informatics (JPI) is an open access peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the advancement of pathology informatics. This is the official journal of the Association for Pathology Informatics (API). The journal aims to publish broadly about pathology informatics and freely disseminate all articles worldwide. This journal is of interest to pathologists, informaticians, academics, researchers, health IT specialists, information officers, IT staff, vendors, and anyone with an interest in informatics. We encourage submissions from anyone with an interest in the field of pathology informatics. We publish all types of papers related to pathology informatics including original research articles, technical notes, reviews, viewpoints, commentaries, editorials, symposia, meeting abstracts, book reviews, and correspondence to the editors. All submissions are subject to rigorous peer review by the well-regarded editorial board and by expert referees in appropriate specialties.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信