ArticleApplications in plant sciences2014
Accuracy and consistency of grass pollen identification by human analysts using electron micrographs of surface ornamentation.
Article in Applications in plant sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Poaceae Pollen from Southern Brazil: Distinguishing Grasslands (Campos) from Forests by Analyzing a Diverse Range of Poaceae Species.Frontiers in plant science · 2016Article
- A neotropical Miocene pollen database employing image-based search and semantic modeling.Applications in plant sciences · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledPREMISE OF THE STUDY: Humans frequently identify pollen grains at a taxonomic rank above species. Grass pollen is a classic case of this situation, which has led to the development of computational methods for identifying grass pollen species. This paper aims to provide context for these computational methods by quantifying the accuracy and consistency of human identification. •
methodsWe measured the ability of nine human analysts to identify 12 species of grass pollen using scanning electron microscopy images. These are the same images that were used in computational identifications. We have measured the coverage, accuracy, and consistency of each analyst, and investigated their ability to recognize duplicate images. •
resultsCoverage ranged from 87.5% to 100%. Mean identification accuracy ranged from 46.67% to 87.5%. The identification consistency of each analyst ranged from 32.5% to 87.5%, and each of the nine analysts produced considerably different identification schemes. The proportion of duplicate image pairs that were missed ranged from 6.25% to 58.33%. • DISCUSSION: The identification errors made by each analyst, which result in a decline in accuracy and consistency, are likely related to psychological factors such as the limited capacity of human memory, fatigue and boredom, recency effects, and positivity bias.
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.