Journal of clinical pathology · 2026
Expert diagnostic reasoning in breast pathology: insights from international masterclass question-and-answer sessions.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rakha Emad A, Quinn Cecily, Shaaban Abeer M, Provenzano Elena, Collins Laura C, Wen Hannah, Brogi Edi, Yang Wentao, Tse Gary M K, Abbas Areeg, Baldwin Jennifer, Altrabulsi Basel, Cserni Gabor, Foschini Maria P, Fox Stephen B, Pinder Sarah E, Schnitt Stuart, Ellis Ian O, Tan Puay Hoon
Аннотация
AIMS: Standardised diagnostic criteria in breast pathology primarily guide classification rather than real-world decision-making in borderline or context-dependent scenarios. This study evaluated question-and-answer data from international masterclass cohorts to characterise real-world diagnostic uncertainties, quantify cognitive domain distributions and detail expert decision-making frameworks.
METHODS: We analysed a structured dataset of 430 attendee questions collected across five international online Breast Pathology Masterclasses (2022-2026), each attended by over 500 participants. Questions were categorised into thematic and cognitive domains by the lead investigator, followed by a collaborative co-author audit to establish classification consensus. Faculty responses were evaluated to assess reasoning patterns, consensus points and areas of diagnostic variation.
RESULTS: Diagnostic uncertainty clustered within specific recurring clinical challenges, with borderline and grey-zone lesions constituting a primary focus. Threshold-based queries regarding diagnostic boundaries formed the single largest cognitive domain (40%), rather than queries seeking basic entity definitions. Other major clinical domains included biomarker interpretation, radiology-pathology discordance management and core biopsy sampling limitations. Analysis of faculty responses identified a recurring morphology-first, context-integrated and risk-informed approach to diagnostic decision-making. While consensus on foundational diagnostic principles was high, minor variations occurred in setting specific quantitative thresholds and framing diagnostic uncertainty in pathology reports.
CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory findings indicate that practical challenges in diagnostic breast pathology frequently arise from boundary determination and contextual ambiguity rather than gaps in established disease classification schemes. Although expert judgement and confidence in managing diagnostic uncertainty develop substantially through experience, educational initiatives may complement experiential learning by making threshold calibration, risk communication and context-dependent reasoning more explicit.
METHODS: We analysed a structured dataset of 430 attendee questions collected across five international online Breast Pathology Masterclasses (2022-2026), each attended by over 500 participants. Questions were categorised into thematic and cognitive domains by the lead investigator, followed by a collaborative co-author audit to establish classification consensus. Faculty responses were evaluated to assess reasoning patterns, consensus points and areas of diagnostic variation.
RESULTS: Diagnostic uncertainty clustered within specific recurring clinical challenges, with borderline and grey-zone lesions constituting a primary focus. Threshold-based queries regarding diagnostic boundaries formed the single largest cognitive domain (40%), rather than queries seeking basic entity definitions. Other major clinical domains included biomarker interpretation, radiology-pathology discordance management and core biopsy sampling limitations. Analysis of faculty responses identified a recurring morphology-first, context-integrated and risk-informed approach to diagnostic decision-making. While consensus on foundational diagnostic principles was high, minor variations occurred in setting specific quantitative thresholds and framing diagnostic uncertainty in pathology reports.
CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory findings indicate that practical challenges in diagnostic breast pathology frequently arise from boundary determination and contextual ambiguity rather than gaps in established disease classification schemes. Although expert judgement and confidence in managing diagnostic uncertainty develop substantially through experience, educational initiatives may complement experiential learning by making threshold calibration, risk communication and context-dependent reasoning more explicit.