For most of the specialty's history, the pathologist has been the hidden physician the patient never gets to meet. New findings are pointing to a changing climate and increased interaction between patients and pathologists.

 

In April 2026, the DPA Patient Engagement Committee surveyed 327 pathologists about their direct interactions with patients. The picture that emerges is one of a specialty slowly stepping out from behind the microscope and looking forward to more patient engagement.

 

The survey found that engagement was already the majority experience among the survey respondents. Seventy-seven percent of them currently meet with patients to discuss results, and 73% were approached to review slides with a patient in the past 12 months. This may no longer be a niche practice confined to a handful of academic centers.

 

More importantly, these interactions seem positive. Among the 233 pathologists with patient contact, 75% rate those interactions positive or very positive — 29% very positive, 46% positive. Just 3% describe them as negative or very negative. Whatever perceived apprehension people have with the idea of pathologists at the bedside, the lived experience of those doing it is overwhelmingly favorable.

 

Respondents named a similar primary benefit: improved patient understanding of their own pathology report. The most cited challenge was equally consistent: translating technical pathology language into potential patient-friendly terms. That may be a skills and training problem and could be a solvable one.

 

Asked to rate their interest in patient digital slide consultations on a 1–10 scale, respondents returned a weighted average of 7.5/10 (n = 301), with 27% scoring 9–10 and another 29% scoring 8. Showing a patient their own digitized tissue, annotated, zoomable, and explained, is an idea the field appears ready for, and is one of the benefits of whole slide imaging.

 

The survey found that barriers are structural, not attitudinal, and this is the survey's most actionable finding. Among the pathologists not currently meeting with patients, 83% are open to doing so in the future, and 57% say they want to offer consultations.

 

The top pathologist barriers cited in the survey are:

  1. Lack of time or a reimbursement model - 41%
  2. Institutional or departmental policy - 38%
  3. Lack of dedicated physical space - 34%
  4. Personal preference or comfort level - 22%
  5. Technical limitations - 18%

Four of these top five are systemic. Only about one in five respondents cites personal comfort. The pathologists’ willingness to do that, according to the survey, is therefore outpacing the infrastructure required to enable this interaction.

 

Three implications follow directly from the data:

  1. Payment policy is crucial. With time and reimbursement the single largest barrier, advocacy for a billable patient-consultation pathway would unlock more engagement than any other intervention.
  2. Institutions should revisit policy. Departmental rules, not pathologist reluctance, may be blocking a large share of willing clinicians. Space and scheduling follow from that.
  3. Communication training deserves a curriculum. The dominant challenge may be translation to clinical practice, not the technology. Residency and CME programs can address it accordingly.

In summary, pathologists surveyed want to talk to patients, patients benefit when they do, and the remaining gap is one of systems rather than will. Removing structural obstacles such as reimbursement, policy, and meeting space would let a substantial share of the specialty move into patient-facing practice.

 

The 2026 DPA Pathology Visions Program Committee, with the theme of 'connecting innovation with purpose,' included a session by Dr. Anne Buckley, MD, PhD. demonstrating the value of digital pathology in patient pathology clinics in this year’s meeting.

 

The session link to ‘What Does My Slide Mean? Digital Pathology's Missing Patient Conversation’ can be found here:

https://digitalpathologyassociation.org/pv26-agenda/show/session/258.