Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18461488›Full record

ReviewChromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology2008

Spatial quantitative analysis of fluorescently labeled nuclear structures: problems, methods, pitfalls.

O Ronneberger, D Baddeley, F Scheipl, P J Verveer, H Burkhardt, C Cremer, L Fahrmeir, T Cremer, B Joffe

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Female Aging Affects Coilin Pattern in Mouse Cumulus Cells.Journal of developmental biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. AneRBC dataset: a benchmark dataset for computer-aided anemia diagnosis using RBC images.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. FISH Going Meso-Scale: A Microscopic Search for Chromatin Domains.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. 3D-FISH Analysis of the Spatial Genome Organization in Skin Cells in Situ.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Bleomycin-induced γH2AX foci map preferentially to replicating domains in CHO9 interphase nuclei.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Spatial quantitation of FISH signals in diploid versus aneuploid nuclei.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

O RonnebergerDepartment of Pattern Recognition and Image Processing, University of Freiburg, 79110, Freiburg, Germany.
D Baddeley
F Scheipl
P J Verveer
H Burkhardt
C Cremer
L Fahrmeir
T Cremer
B Joffe
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEHeidelberg University · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DECenter for Integrated Protein Science Munich · DEMax Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The vast majority of microscopic data in biology of the cell nucleus is currently collected using fluorescence microscopy, and most of these data are subsequently subjected to quantitative analysis. The analysis process unites a number of steps, from image acquisition to statistics, and at each of these steps decisions must be made that may crucially affect the conclusions of the whole study. This often presents a really serious problem because the researcher is typically a biologist, while the decisions to be taken require expertise in the fields of physics, computer image analysis, and statistics. The researcher has to choose between multiple options for data collection, numerous programs for preprocessing and processing of images, and a number of statistical approaches. Written for biologists, this article discusses some of the typical problems and errors that should be avoided. The article was prepared by a team uniting expertise in biology, microscopy, image analysis, and statistics. It considers the options a researcher has at the stages of data acquisition (choice of the microscope and acquisition settings), preprocessing (filtering, intensity normalization, deconvolution), image processing (radial distribution, clustering, co-localization, shape and orientation of objects), and statistical analysis.

Indexed as

Cell NucleusFluorescent DyesHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLaser Scanning CytometryMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, FluorescenceMicroscopy, Fluorescence, MultiphotonPrincipal Component AnalysisFluorescent Dyes

Identifiers

PMID18461488
OpenAlexW2103054900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.