ArticleBiomedical reports2017
Comparison between digital and optical microscopy: Analysis in a mouse gut inflammation model.
Article in Biomedical reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the whole slide imaging and conventional light microscopy in the grading of oral epithelial dysplasia: a multi-institutional study.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2021Article
- Inhibition of Mixed Biofilms ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- A histomorphometric classification system for normal and inflamed mouse duodenum-Quali-quantitative approach.International journal of experimental pathology · 2018Article
- Digital microscopy: A routine mandate in future? A leaf out of Covid-19 pandemic laboratory experience.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFPReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Virtual microscopy is currently widely used for various purposes, such as teaching, archiving, collaborations and research. Although the cost of this technique has reduced, it continues to be expensive for the majority of laboratories in developing countries. The Graduate Program in Pathology at the Federal Fluminense University (Niterói, Brazil) has acquired equipment for virtual microscopy. However, this novel method faced prejudice, as students and technicians were skeptical about its reliability. Thus, the aim of the current study was to evaluate whether virtual microscopy is a reliable method of analysis for our research. Thus, a mouse gut inflammation model developed by our research group was used in the present study. Analysis was performed using optical microscopy and digital imaging using the APERIO scanning system and the ImageScope® software. Intestinal epithelial cells (IECs), intra epithelial leucocytes (IEL), and villi number and area were evaluated. No significant differences were observed in villi number, IEC and IEL; however, the villi area was significantly smaller when measured using the computer. Thus, the present study indicates that virtual microscopy is a trustworthy method for research purposes.
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.