| Statement | Perception; % of respondents | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Glass slides are superior | Digital slides are superior | Both types are similar | |
| Availability of rare cases for examinations | 30 | 40 | 30 |
| Consistency of tissue appearance among examinations | 30 | 40 | 30 |
| Availability of small biopsy specimens in the examination | 35 | 30 | 35 |
| Need to carry a microscope to the examination | 5 | 90 | 5 |
| Need for additional training before the examination | 70 | 5 | 25 |
| Predictability of examination cases | 30 | 10 | 60 |
| Flexibility of exchange of cases between centres | 10 | 60 | 30 |
| Ease of identification of each slide | 50 | 15 | 35 |
| Conservation of storage space in pathology departments | 5 | 90 | 5 |
| Cost for use during general practice | 50 | 25 | 25 |
| Representation of the lesion | 50 | 5 | 45 |
| Overall subjective quality of images | 90 | 5 | 5 |
| Appropriateness for cytology cases | 80 | 10 | 10 |
| Time needed for diagnosis | 90 | 5 | 5 |
| Navigation through different magnifications | 85 | 5 | 10 |
| Preparation for real practice | 90 | 0 | 10 |
| Practicality for regular use during training | 70 | 5 | 25 |
| Ease of navigating across slides | 85 | 5 | 10 |
| Speed when examining cases | 90 | 5 | 5 |