Table 3 Facilitators for CPath use in clinical practice mentioned in ≥2 interviews (n = 72).

• Availability of stand-alone CPath

2

• Positive attitude

14

• Encouragement by clinicians

7

• Availability open source CPath applications

3

• Outcome control of CPath remains necessary

6

• Encouragement by pathologist colleagues

2

• (Easy) integration of CPath in IT structures

6

• CPath use in clinical practice

2

• Align CPath use with clinicians

2

• CPath analysis on background

4

• Involved in CPath development

6

• Clinicians trust pathologists in use/ not use CPath

4

• CPath being able to sort cases on urgency within workflow

3

• Gaining basic understanding of CPath

3

• Including use of CPath in pathology reporting

10

• First tissue analysis by CPath, next pathologist (supportive application)

9

• Having basic understanding of CPath

11

• First tissue analysis by pathologist, next CPath

• (leading application)

9

• Gaining trust in CPath step by step

8

• Usefulness depends on speed and user-friendliness CPath

4

• Having appointments with suppliers CPath

2

• Leading role “standard” work

6

• Intention to use CPath for several applications^b

11

• Complex diagnostics

2

• CPath use in near future

4

• Including clinical outcomes in CPath development

2

• Data integration task when CPath is used

7

• Variety of data needed in CPath development

2

• Validation of CPath

9

• Proven reliability CPath

7

• Specific validation with clinical outcomes

10

• Validation non-inferiority studies

3

• Validation per laboratory

6

• Prospective validation studies needed

5

• Retrospective validation studies sufficient

4

• Studies on time savings

2

• Reliable supplier CPath, including data usage

5

• Validation by supplier

4

• Ongoing development CPath by supplier

2

• No preferences supplier

4

• Advantage of time-savings

12

• Decreasing repetitive tasks

4

• Improving workflow efficiency

5

• Improving diagnosis quality/accuracy

9

• Better definition of currently known prognostic factors

5

• Improving standardized diagnostic outcome CPath

10

• Improving detection due to narrowing analysis area

5

• Lowering workload

2

• More comprehensive CPath

2

• Finding new prognostic factors

7

• Improving treatment choices for patients

2

• Availability of digital workflow

2

• Updating CPath centrally

2

• FDA^c approved CPath

2

• One supplier for entire digital workflow including CPath

2

• Central implementation pathology association

7

• Global regulation CPath clinical use

2

• Available CPath applications

3

• Autonomous decision pathologist CPath use because accountability

6

• CPath in pathology resident education

13

• Providing feedback to supplier of CPath

2

• More explainable pathology due to CPath

2

• Central monitoring system

3

• Learning pathology analysis before CPath use in resident education

4

• Prospective monitoring CPath clinical use

9

• Anticipating in labor market because of use of CPath

3

• CPath as part of continuing pathology education

2

• Automatic fill-in SSR^a

5

• Policy of pathology association regarding CPath use

3

• Connecting CPath with other information systems

4

• Enable to assign CPath to case manually

2

• Upfront quality assurance

10