Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28873173›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2017

Automated Photoreceptor Cell Identification on Nonconfocal Adaptive Optics Images Using Multiscale Circular Voting.

Jianfei Liu, HaeWon Jung, Alfredo Dubra, Johnny Tam

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Optica · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jianfei LiuOphthalmic Genetics and Visual Function Branch, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.
HaeWon JungOphthalmic Genetics and Visual Function Branch, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.
Alfredo DubraDepartment of Ophthalmology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, United States.
Johnny TamOphthalmic Genetics and Visual Function Branch, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.
National Eye Institute · USStanford University · US

Funding

Adaptive Optics Retinal ImagingZIAEY000544 · NEI · NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE · PI TAM, JOHNNY · 2015 to 2025
$24.0M
Platform Technologies for Microscopic Retinal Imaging: Development & TranslationU01EY025477 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DUBRA, ALFREDO · 2015 to 2019
$4.4M
NEI NIH HHS U01 EY025477
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscopy (AOSLO) has enabled quantification of the photoreceptor mosaic in the living human eye using metrics such as cell density and average spacing. These rely on the identification of individual cells. Here, we demonstrate a novel approach for computer-aided identification of cone photoreceptors on nonconfocal split detection AOSLO images. Methods: Algorithms for identification of cone photoreceptors were developed, based on multiscale circular voting (MSCV) in combination with a priori knowledge that split detection images resemble Nomarski differential interference contrast images, in which dark and bright regions are present on the two sides of each cell. The proposed algorithm locates dark and bright region pairs, iteratively refining the identification across multiple scales. Identification accuracy was assessed in data from 10 subjects by comparing automated identifications with manual labeling, followed by computation of density and spacing metrics for comparison to histology and published data. Results: There was good agreement between manual and automated cone identifications with overall recall, precision, and F1 score of 92.9%, 90.8%, and 91.8%, respectively. On average, computed density and spacing values using automated identification were within 10.7% and 11.2% of the expected histology values across eccentricities ranging from 0.5 to 6.2 mm. There was no statistically significant difference between MSCV-based and histology-based density measurements (P = 0.96, Kolmogorov-Smirnov 2-sample test). Conclusions: MSCV can accurately detect cone photoreceptors on split detection images across a range of eccentricities, enabling quick, objective estimation of photoreceptor mosaic metrics, which will be important for future clinical trials utilizing adaptive optics.

Indexed as

Image Processing, Computer-AssistedAdultAlgorithmsCell CountFemaleHumansMaleOphthalmoscopyRetinal Cone Photoreceptor CellsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28873173
PMCPMC5586244
OpenAlexW2743972933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.