@inproceedings{RosbachAmmelingKruegeletal.2025, author = {Rosbach, Emely and Ammeling, Jonas and Kr{\"u}gel, Sebastian and Kießig, Angelika and Fritz, Alexis and Ganz, Jonathan and Puget, Chlo{\´e} and Donovan, Taryn and Klang, Andrea and K{\"o}ller, Maximilian C. and Bolfa, Pompei and Tecilla, Marco and Denk, Daniela and Kiupel, Matti and Paraschou, Georgios and Kok, Mun Keong and Haake, Alexander F. H. and de Krijger, Ronald R. and Sonnen, Andreas F.-P. and Kasantikul, Tanit and Dorrestein, Gerry M. and Smedley, Rebecca C. and Stathonikos, Nikolas and Uhl, Matthias and Bertram, Christof and Riener, Andreas and Aubreville, Marc}, title = {"When Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right" - Examining Confirmation Bias and the Role of Time Pressure During Human-AI Collaboration in Computational Pathology}, pages = {528}, booktitle = {CHI'25: Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems}, editor = {Yamashita, Naomi and Evers, Vanessa and Yatani, Koji and Ding, Xianghua and Lee, Bongshin and Chetty, Marshini and Toups-Dugas, Phoebe}, publisher = {ACM}, address = {New York}, isbn = {979-8-4007-1394-1}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713319}, year = {2025}, abstract = {Artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support systems hold promise for enhancing diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in computational pathology. However, human-AI collaboration can introduce and amplify cognitive biases, like confirmation bias caused by false confirmation when erroneous human opinions are reinforced by inaccurate AI output. This bias may increase under time pressure, a ubiquitous factor in routine pathology, as it strains practitioners' cognitive resources. We quantified confirmation bias triggered by AI-induced false confirmation and examined the role of time constraints in a web-based experiment, where trained pathology experts (n=28) estimated tumor cell percentages. Our results suggest that AI integration fuels confirmation bias, evidenced by a statistically significant positive linear-mixed-effects model coefficient linking AI recommendations mirroring flawed human judgment and alignment with system advice. Conversely, time pressure appeared to weaken this relationship. These findings highlight potential risks of AI in healthcare and aim to support the safe integration of clinical decision support systems.}, language = {en} } @article{BertramAubrevilleGurtneretal.2020, author = {Bertram, Christof and Aubreville, Marc and Gurtner, Corinne and Bartel, Alexander and Corner, Sarah M. and Dettwiler, Martina and Kershaw, Olivia and Noland, Erica L. and Schmidt, Anja and Sledge, Dodd G. and Smedley, Rebecca C. and Thaiwong, Tuddow and Kiupel, Matti and Maier, Andreas and Klopfleisch, Robert}, title = {Computerized Calculation of Mitotic Count Distribution in Canine Cutaneous Mast Cell Tumor Sections: Mitotic Count Is Area Dependent}, volume = {57}, journal = {Veterinary Pathology}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {London}, issn = {1544-2217}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0300985819890686}, pages = {214 -- 226}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{MarzahlAubrevilleBertrametal.2020, author = {Marzahl, Christian and Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Gerlach, Stefan and Maier, Jennifer and Voigt, J{\"o}rn and Hill, Jenny and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Is crowd-algorithm collaboration an advanced alternative to crowd-sourcing on cytology slides?}, booktitle = {Bildverarbeitung f{\"u}r die Medizin 2020, Algorithmen - Systeme - Anwendungen. Proceedings des Workshops vom 15. bis 17. M{\"a}rz 2020 in Berlin}, editor = {Tolxdorff, Thomas and Deserno, Thomas Martin and Handels, Heinz and Maier, Andreas and Maier-Hein, Klaus H. and Palm, Christoph}, publisher = {Springer Vieweg}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-29266-9}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-29267-6_5}, pages = {26 -- 31}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{AubrevilleBertramJabarietal.2020, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Jabari, Samir and Marzahl, Christian and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Inter-species, inter-tissue domain adaptation for mitotic figure assessment}, booktitle = {Bildverarbeitung f{\"u}r die Medizin 2020, Algorithmen - Systeme - Anwendungen. Proceedings des Workshops vom 15. bis 17. M{\"a}rz 2020 in Berlin}, subtitle = {learning new tricks from old dogs}, editor = {Tolxdorff, Thomas and Deserno, Thomas Martin and Handels, Heinz and Maier, Andreas and Maier-Hein, Klaus H. and Palm, Christoph}, publisher = {Springer Vieweg}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-29266-9}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-29267-6_1}, pages = {1 -- 7}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{AubrevilleBertramKlopfleischetal.2019, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Field of Interest Proposal for Augmented Mitotic Cell Count}, volume = {2}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies - BIOIMAGING}, subtitle = {Comparison of Two Convolutional Networks}, publisher = {SciTePress}, address = {Set{\´u}bal}, isbn = {978-989-758-353-7}, issn = {2184-4305}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.5220/0007365700300037}, pages = {30 -- 37}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{BertramAubrevilleDonovanetal.2021, author = {Bertram, Christof and Aubreville, Marc and Donovan, Taryn and Bartel, Alexander and Wilm, Frauke and Marzahl, Christian and Assenmacher, Charles-Antoine and Becker, Kathrin and Bennett, Mark and Corner, Sarah M. and Cossic, Brieuc and Denk, Daniela and Dettwiler, Martina and Garcia Gonzalez, Beatriz and Gurtner, Corinne and Haverkamp, Ann-Kathrin and Heier, Annabelle and Lehmbecker, Annika and Merz, Sophie and Noland, Erica L. and Plog, Stephanie and Schmidt, Anja and Sebastian, Franziska and Sledge, Dodd G. and Smedley, Rebecca C. and Tecilla, Marco and Thaiwong, Tuddow and Fuchs-Baumgartinger, Andrea and Meuten, Donald J. and Breininger, Katharina and Kiupel, Matti and Maier, Andreas and Klopfleisch, Robert}, title = {Computer-assisted mitotic count using a deep learning-based algorithm improves interobserver reproducibility and accuracy}, volume = {59}, journal = {Veterinary Pathology}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {London}, issn = {1544-2217}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/03009858211067478}, pages = {211 -- 226}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The mitotic count (MC) is an important histological parameter for prognostication of malignant neoplasms. However, it has inter- and intraobserver discrepancies due to difficulties in selecting the region of interest (MC-ROI) and in identifying or classifying mitotic figures (MFs). Recent progress in the field of artificial intelligence has allowed the development of high-performance algorithms that may improve standardization of the MC. As algorithmic predictions are not flawless, computer-assisted review by pathologists may ensure reliability. In the present study, we compared partial (MC-ROI preselection) and full (additional visualization of MF candidates and display of algorithmic confidence values) computer-assisted MC analysis to the routine (unaided) MC analysis by 23 pathologists for whole-slide images of 50 canine cutaneous mast cell tumors (ccMCTs). Algorithmic predictions aimed to assist pathologists in detecting mitotic hotspot locations, reducing omission of MFs, and improving classification against imposters. The interobserver consistency for the MC significantly increased with computer assistance (interobserver correlation coefficient, ICC = 0.92) compared to the unaided approach (ICC = 0.70). Classification into prognostic stratifications had a higher accuracy with computer assistance. The algorithmically preselected hotspot MC-ROIs had a consistently higher MCs than the manually selected MC-ROIs. Compared to a ground truth (developed with immunohistochemistry for phosphohistone H3), pathologist performance in detecting individual MF was augmented when using computer assistance (F1-score of 0.68 increased to 0.79) with a reduction in false negatives by 38\%. The results of this study demonstrate that computer assistance may lead to more reproducible and accurate MCs in ccMCTs.}, language = {en} } @article{MarzahlAubrevilleBertrametal.2020, author = {Marzahl, Christian and Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Stayt, Jason and Jasensky, Anne-Katherine and Bartenschlager, Florian and Fragoso-Garcia, Marco and Barton, Ann K. and Elsemann, Svenja and Jabari, Samir and Krauth, Jens and Madhu, Prathmesh and Voigt, J{\"o}rn and Hill, Jenny and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Deep Learning-based quantification of pulmonary hemosiderophages in cytology slides}, volume = {10}, pages = {9795}, journal = {Scientific Reports}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, address = {London}, issn = {2045-2322}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65958-2}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH) is a common condition in sport horses with negative impact on performance. Cytology of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid by use of a scoring system is considered the most sensitive diagnostic method. Macrophages are classified depending on the degree of cytoplasmic hemosiderin content. The current gold standard is manual grading, which is however monotonous and time-consuming. We evaluated state-of-the-art deep learning-based methods for single cell macrophage classification and compared them against the performance of nine cytology experts and evaluated inter- and intra-observer variability. Additionally, we evaluated object detection methods on a novel data set of 17 completely annotated cytology whole slide images (WSI) containing 78,047 hemosiderophages. Our deep learning-based approach reached a concordance of 0.85, partially exceeding human expert concordance (0.68 to 0.86, mean of 0.73, SD of 0.04). Intra-observer variability was high (0.68 to 0.88) and inter-observer concordance was moderate (Fleiss' kappa = 0.67). Our object detection approach has a mean average precision of 0.66 over the five classes from the whole slide gigapixel image and a computation time of below two minutes. To mitigate the high inter- and intra-rater variability, we propose our automated object detection pipeline, enabling accurate, reproducible and quick EIPH scoring in WSI.}, language = {en} } @article{DonovanMooreBertrametal.2021, author = {Donovan, Taryn and Moore, Frances M. and Bertram, Christof and Luong, Richard and Bolfa, Pompei and Klopfleisch, Robert and Tvedten, Harold and Salas, Elisa N. and Whitley, Derick and Aubreville, Marc and Meuten, Donald J.}, title = {Mitotic Figures - Normal, Atypical, and Imposters: A Guide to Identification}, volume = {58}, journal = {Veterinary pathology}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {London}, issn = {1544-2217}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0300985820980049}, pages = {243 -- 257}, year = {2021}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{AubrevilleBertramKlopfleischetal.2019, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Augmented mitotic cell count using field of interest proposal}, booktitle = {Bildverarbeitung f{\"u}r die Medizin 2019, Algorithmen - Systeme - Anwendungen, Proceedings des Workshops vom 17. bis 19. M{\"a}rz 2019 in L{\"u}beck}, editor = {Handels, Heinz and Deserno, Thomas Martin and Maier, Andreas and Maier-Hein, Klaus H. and Palm, Christoph and Tolxdorff, Thomas}, publisher = {Springer Vieweg}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-25325-7}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25326-4_71}, pages = {321 -- 326}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{AubrevilleBertramMarzahletal.2020, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Bertram, Christof and Marzahl, Christian and Gurtner, Corinne and Dettwiler, Martina and Schmidt, Anja and Bartenschlager, Florian and Merz, Sophie and Fragoso-Garcia, Marco and Kershaw, Olivia and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {Deep learning algorithms out-perform veterinary pathologists in detecting the mitotically most active tumor region}, volume = {10}, pages = {16447}, journal = {Scientific reports}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, address = {London}, issn = {2045-2322}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-73246-2}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Manual count of mitotic figures, which is determined in the tumor region with the highest mitotic activity, is a key parameter of most tumor grading schemes. It can be, however, strongly dependent on the area selection due to uneven mitotic figure distribution in the tumor section. We aimed to assess the question, how significantly the area selection could impact the mitotic count, which has a known high inter-rater disagreement. On a data set of 32 whole slide images of H\&E-stained canine cutaneous mast cell tumor, fully annotated for mitotic figures, we asked eight veterinary pathologists (five board-certified, three in training) to select a field of interest for the mitotic count. To assess the potential difference on the mitotic count, we compared the mitotic count of the selected regions to the overall distribution on the slide. Additionally, we evaluated three deep learning-based methods for the assessment of highest mitotic density: In one approach, the model would directly try to predict the mitotic count for the presented image patches as a regression task. The second method aims at deriving a segmentation mask for mitotic figures, which is then used to obtain a mitotic density. Finally, we evaluated a two-stage object-detection pipeline based on state-of-the-art architectures to identify individual mitotic figures. We found that the predictions by all models were, on average, better than those of the experts. The two-stage object detector performed best and outperformed most of the human pathologists on the majority of tumor cases. The correlation between the predicted and the ground truth mitotic count was also best for this approach (0.963-0.979). Further, we found considerable differences in position selection between pathologists, which could partially explain the high variance that has been reported for the manual mitotic count. To achieve better inter-rater agreement, we propose to use a computer-based area selection for support of the pathologist in the manual mitotic count.}, language = {en} } @article{BertramAubrevilleGurtneretal.2020, author = {Bertram, Christof and Aubreville, Marc and Gurtner, Corinne and Bartel, Alexander and Corner, Sarah M. and Dettwiler, Martina and Kershaw, Olivia and Noland, Erica L. and Schmidt, Anja and Sledge, Dodd G. and Smedley, Rebecca C. and Thaiwong, Tuddow and Kiupel, Matti and Maier, Andreas and Klopfleisch, Robert}, title = {Mitotic count in canine cutaneous mast cell tumours}, volume = {2020}, journal = {Journal of Comparative Pathology}, subtitle = {not accurate but reproducible}, number = {174}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {London}, issn = {1532-3129}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcpa.2019.10.015}, pages = {143}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{AubrevilleKrappmannBertrametal.2017, author = {Aubreville, Marc and Krappmann, Maximilian and Bertram, Christof and Klopfleisch, Robert and Maier, Andreas}, title = {A Guided Spatial Transformer Network for Histology Cell Differentiation}, booktitle = {VCBM '17: Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop on Visual Computing for Biology and Medicine}, publisher = {Eurographics Association}, address = {Goslar}, isbn = {978-3-03868-036-9}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.2312/vcbm.20171233}, pages = {21 -- 25}, year = {2017}, language = {en} }