01. Walkowski, S. and Szymas, J. (2011). Quality evaluation of virtual slides using methods based on comparing common image areas. Diagn Pathol, 6 (Suppl 1), S14. doi: 10.1186/1746-1596-6-S1-S14

02. Kalinski, T., Zwönitzer, R., Grabellus, F., Sheu, S.-Y., Sel, S., Hofmann, H., . . . Roessner, A. (2009). Lossy compression in diagnostic virtual 3-dimensional microscopy—where is the limit? Hum Pathol, 40(7), 998-1005. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2008.12.010

03. Farahani N et al. Whole slide imaging in pathology: advantages, limitations, and emerging perspectives. Pathology and Laboratory Medicine International. 2015. 7: 23-33.

04. Pantanowitz L et al. Review of the current state of whole slide imaging in pathology. J Pathol Inform. 2011. 2: 36.


06. Karim N. Lecture: Conference Chair’s Opening Address. Digital Pathology Congress: Asia. Global Engage. Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. 2016: 22-23 August.

07. Weinstein, R. S. (1986). Prospects for telepathology. Hum Pathol, 17(5), 433-434. doi: 10.1016/s0046-8177(86)80028-4

08. Weinstein, R. S., Bloom, K. J. and Rozek, L. S. (1987). Telepathology and the Networking of Pathology Diagnostic services. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., 111, 646-652.

09. Griffin J and Treanor D. (2017). Digital Pathology in Clinical Use: where are we now and what is holding us back? Histopathology, 70:134-145.

10. Isaacs, M., Lennerz, J. K., Yates, S., Clermont, W., Rossi, J. and Pfeifer, J. D. (2011). Implementation of whole slide imaging in surgical pathology: A value added approach. J Pathol Inform, 2, 39. doi: 10.4103/2153-3539.84232

11. Murray M. Laboratory Information Management Systems.

12. Mitchell B. Bandwidth. 22 May 2015

13. University Health Service, University of Michigan. Computer Ergonomics: How to Protect Yourself from Strain and Pain.


15. Silver R. Pixel. December 2014

16. DICOM Standards Committee, Working Group 26, Pathology. DICOM Supplement 145: Whole Slide Microscopic Image IOD and SOP Classes. Virgina USA. 24 August 2010. 

17. Pinco, J., Goulart, R. A., Otis, C. N., Garb, J. and Pantanowitz, L. (2009). Impact of digital image manipulation in cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 133(1), 57-61. doi: 10.1043/1543-2165-133.1.57

18. Parker M. Barcodes Explained.

19. Snyder et al. Patient misidentifications caused by errors in standard bar code technology. Clin Chem. 2010. 56(10): 1554-1560.

20. Thorstenson S et al. Implementation of large-scale routine diagnostics using whole slide imaging in Sweden: Digital pathology experiences 2006-2013. J Pathol Inform. 2014. 5: 15

21. Foran, D., Meer, P., Papthomas T.,Marsic, I. Compression Guidelines for Diagnostic Telepathology. Accessed from

22. Krupinski EA, Johnson JP, Jaw S, Graham AR, Weinstein RS. Compressing pathology whole-slide images using a human and model observer evaluation. J Pathol Inform [serial online] 2012 [cited 2017 Apr 14];3:17. Available from:

23. Cornish T. Lecture: Selection and Implementation of a Digital Pathology System. Pathology Informatics Summit 2016, May 23-26. Wyndham Hotel Pittsburgh PA. 2016: May 23.


25. Digital Pathology Association. Archival and Retrieval in Digital Pathology Systems. Retrieved from On April 4 2017.

26. RCPAQAP. Instructions for viewing Virtual Microscope Images.pdf. RCPA Quality Assurance Programs. NSW. Australia.

27. Wilson T. How Streaming Video and Audio Work."

28. Bidgood WD Jr et al. Understanding and Using DICOM, the Data Interchange Standard for Biomedical Imaging. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1997 May-Jun; 4(3): 199–212.

29. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine. Rosslyn VA.

30. NEMA. PS3.1 DICOM PS3.1 2016c. DICOM Part 1 - Introduction and Overview.


32. Rouse M. PKI (public key infrastructure). 33. Digicert. About SSL Certificates and SSL Encryption.

34. Rouse M. Firewall.

35. OWASP Foundation. 29 June 2016.

36. Standards Australia. Committee IT-014, Health Informatics. HB174 Information Security Management Implementation Guide for the Health Sector. 10 March 2003

37. Australian Government. Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. Privacy Act.

38. Australian Government, Trusted Information Sharing Network (TISN). User-access management - A defence in depth control analysis. June 2008.

39. Pantanowitz et al. Validating Whole Slide Imaging for Diagnostic Purposes in Pathology. Guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013. 137: 1710-1722

40. RCPA policy: Reporting of Histopathology and Non-Gynaecological Cytopathology Specimens outside the Laboratory. September 2015

41. Bauer TW et al. Validation of whole slide imaging for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013. 137: 518-524

42. RCPA Guideline. Setting up a laboratory. Number: 2/2009. November 2009

43. Ranson, D. (2007). Medical Issues: Telemedicine and the Law. J Law Med, 15(3), 356-359;

44. Cucoranu IC et al. Letter to the Editor. Arch Pathol Lab Med. March 2014. 138: 300.

45. Pekmezci M et al. Pitfalls in the use of whole slide imaging for the diagnosis of central nervous system tumours: A pilot study in surgical neuropathology. J Pathol Inform. 2016. 7: 25.

46. Snead et al. Validation of digital pathology imaging for primary histopathological diagnosis. Histopathology. 2016. 68: 1063-1072.

47. Hartman D. Lecture: Early Adoption and Implementation of Digital Pathology. Digital Pathology Congress: Asia. Global Engage. Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. 2016: 22-23 August.

48. Kalinski T et al. Virtua; 3D microscopy using multipane whole slide images in diagnostic pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008. 130: 259-264

49. Ito T. Lecture: Validation of whole slide imaging. Digital Pathology Congress: Asia. Global Engage. Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. 2016: 22-23 August

Page last updated:

Copyright © 2022 RCPA. All rights reserved.