ArticleACS combinatorial science2012
Spot identification and quality control in cell-based microarrays.
Article in ACS combinatorial science, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3D Bioprinting in Tissue Engineering for Medical Applications: The Classic and the Hybrid.Polymers · 2020Review
- Context-explorer: Analysis of spatially organized protein expression in high-throughput screens.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Statistical models discriminating between complex samples measured with microfluidic receptor-cell arrays.PloS one · 2019Article
- Non-cell-adhesive substrates for printing of arrayed biomaterials.Advanced healthcare materials · 2015Article
- 3D bioprinting for engineering complex tissues.Biotechnology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Cell-based microarrays are being increasingly used as a tool for combinatorial and high throughput screening of cellular microenvironments. Analysis of microarrays requires several steps, including microarray imaging, identification of cell spots, quality control, and data exploration. While high content image analysis, cell counting, and cell pattern recognition methods are established, there is a need for new postprocessing and quality control methods for cell-based microarrays used to investigate combinatorial microenvironments. Previously, microarrayed cell spot identification and quality control were performed manually, leading to excessive processing time and potentially resulting in human bias. This work introduces an automated approach to identify cell-based microarray spots and spot quality control. The approach was used to analyze the adhesion of murine cardiac side population cells on combinatorial arrays of extracellular matrix proteins. Microarrays were imaged by automated fluorescence microscopy and cells were identified using open-source image analysis software (CellProfiler). From these images, clusters of cells making up single cell spots were reliably identified by analyzing the distances between cells using a density-based clustering algorithm (OPTICS). Naïve Bayesian classifiers trained on manually scored training sets identified good and poor quality spots using spot size, number of cells per spot, and cell location as quality control criteria. Combined, the approach identified 78% of high quality spots and 87% of poor quality spots. Full factorial analysis of the resulting microarray data revealed that collagen IV exhibited the highest positive effect on cell attachment. This data processing approach allows for fast and unbiased analysis of cell-based microarray data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.