Background:There is an increasing interest in using digitized whole-slide imaging (WSI) for routine surgical pathology diagnoses. Screencasts are digital recordings of computer screen output with advanced interactive features that allow for the preparation of videos. Screencasts that include hyperlinks to WSIs could help teach pathology residents how to become familiar with technologies that they are likely to use in their future career.Materials and Methods:Twenty screencasts were prepared with Camtasia 2.0 software (TechSmith, Okemos, MI, USA). They included clinical history, videos of chest X-rays and/or chest computed tomography images, links to WSI digitized with an Aperio Turbo AT scanner (Leica Biosystems, Buffalo Grove, IL, USA), pre- and posttests, and faculty-narrated videos of the WSI in a manner closely resembling a slide seminar and other educational materials. Screencasts were saved in a hospital network, Screencast.com, YouTube.com, and Vimeo.com. The screencasts were viewed by 12 pathology residents and fellows who made diagnoses, answered the quizzes, and took a survey with questions designed to evaluate their perception of the quality of this technology. Quiz results were automatically e-mailed to faculty. Pre- and posttest results were compared using a paired t-test.Results:Screencasts can be viewed with Windows PC and Mac operating systems and mobile devices; only videos saved in our network and screencast.com could be used to generate quizzes. Participants’ feedback was very favorable with average scores ranging from 4.5 to 4.8 (on a scale of 5). Mean posttest scores (87.0% [±21.6%]) were significantly improved over those in the pretest quizzes (48.5% [±31.2%]) (P < 0.0001).Conclusion:Screencasts with WSI that allow residents and fellows to diagnose cases using digital microscopy may prove to be a useful technology to enhance the pathology education. Future studies with larger numbers of screencasts and participants are needed to optimize various teaching strategies.

Abstract— This investigation determined the error associated with colour reproduction when different light meters were used to characterize a CRT. Luminance measurements were taken with three light‐measuring instruments to produce gamma tables. The tables were used to calibrate 28 colours. Results showed that the most acceptable instrument was one that accurately measured light below 0.001 cd/m2 and that used colour‐matching tables to weight the radiant energy. Less‐sensitive instruments that used fixed filters to model the colour‐matching functions produced colours that were perceptibly different from the specified colours. The reproduction errors were evaluated against colour discrimination thresholds and ΔE*. If accurate reproduction of luminance is not essential, a less‐sensitive instrument with a cutoff of 0.01 cd/m2 and three separate filters for modeling the colour‐matching functions may be adequate. Complete gamma‐correction tables (voltage input/luminance output) for each gun were not necessary. Accurate colour calibration can be based on a limited number of luminance measurements plus an interpolation procedure to determine the intervening values in the gamma tables. The reliability of the initial characterization was tested after an interval of 9 months. The maximum luminance of the monitor decreased considerably over this time period. A simple recalibration method, outlined by Lucassen and Walraven (Ref. 1) was effective in restoring luminance accuracy. This method allows for periodic adjustments to the luminance output on a CRT using a small number of measurements.