ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2016
Quantitative analysis of ex vivo colorectal epithelium using an automated feature extraction algorithm for microendoscopy image data.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2016. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Artificial Intelligence in the Detection and Characterization of Colorectal Neoplasm.Gut and liver · 2021Review
- Image computing for fibre-bundle endomicroscopy: A review.Medical image analysis · 2020Review
- Article
- Fluorescein as a topical fluorescent contrast agent for quantitative microendoscopic inspection of colorectal epithelium.Biomedical optics express · 2017Article
- Artificial intelligence in luminal endoscopy.Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Qualitative screening for colorectal polyps via fiber bundle microendoscopy imaging has shown promising results, with studies reporting high rates of sensitivity and specificity, as well as low interobserver variability with trained clinicians. A quantitative image quality control and image feature extraction algorithm (QFEA) was designed to lessen the burden of training and provide objective data for improved clinical efficacy of this method. After a quantitative image quality control step, QFEA extracts field-of-view area, crypt area, crypt circularity, and crypt number per image. To develop and validate this QFEA, a training set of microendoscopy images was collected from freshly resected porcine colon epithelium. The algorithm was then further validated on ex vivo image data collected from eight human subjects, selected from clinically normal appearing regions distant from grossly visible tumor in surgically resected colorectal tissue. QFEA has proven flexible in application to both mosaics and individual images, and its automated crypt detection sensitivity ranges from 71 to 94% despite intensity and contrast variation within the field of view. It also demonstrates the ability to detect and quantify differences in grossly normal regions among different subjects, suggesting the potential efficacy of this approach in detecting occult regions of dysplasia.
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.