ReviewMedical & biological engineering & computing2016
A review of metaphase chromosome image selection techniques for automatic karyotype generation.
Review in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chromosome Karyotyping in Hematological Malignancies: Current Status and Future Directions.Current medical science · 2026Review
- DeepKaryo-Check: a two-stage automated screening framework for chromosomal numerical and structural abnormalities in clinical karyotype analysis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- Clinical validation of artificial intelligence-assisted karyotyping on peripheral blood in a cytogenetic diagnostic laboratory.Human genetics · 2025Review
- Review
- Cancer cytogenetics in the era of artificial intelligence: shaping the future of chromosome analysis.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- An automatic progressive chromosome segmentation approach using deep learning with traditional image processing.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2024Article
- Classification of analyzable metaphase images using transfer learning and fine tuning.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2022Article
- RC-Net: Regression Correction for End-To-End Chromosome Instance Segmentation.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Development and application of a rapid molecular method for detection of fusion genes in pediatric leukemia.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2018Article
- Correlation-based feature selection and classification via regression of segmented chromosomes using geometric features.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The karyotype is analyzed to detect the genetic abnormalities. It is generated by arranging the chromosomes after extracting them from the metaphase chromosome images. The chromosomes are non-rigid bodies that contain the genetic information of an individual. The metaphase chromosome image spread contains the chromosomes, but these chromosomes are not distinct bodies; they can either be individual chromosomes or be touching one another; they may be bent or even may be overlapping and thus forming a cluster of chromosomes. The extraction of chromosomes from these touching and overlapping chromosomes is a very tedious process. The segmentation of a random metaphase chromosome image may not give us correct and accurate results. Therefore, before taking up a metaphase chromosome image for analysis, it must be analyzed for the orientation of the chromosomes it contains. The various reported methods for metaphase chromosome image selection for automatic karyotype generation are compared in this paper. After analysis, it has been concluded that each metaphase chromosome image selection method has its advantages and disadvantages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26676686What 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.