Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29360430›Full record

ReviewTranslational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine2018

Image analysis and machine learning for detecting malaria.

Mahdieh Poostchi, Kamolrat Silamut, Richard J Maude, Stefan Jaeger, George Thoma

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 109 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
109citing papers in PubMed
25.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

109 citing papers in PubMed, 536 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Remoscope: a label-free imaging cytometer for malaria diagnostics.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

49 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Mahdieh PoostchiU.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Kamolrat SilamutMahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Richard J MaudeMahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Stefan JaegerU.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. Electronic address: stefan.jaeger@nih.gov.
George ThomaU.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
United States National Library of Medicine · USMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit · THMahidol University · THNational Institutes of Health · US

Funding

MalariaScreener: image analysis and machine learning for detecting malaria in blood filmZIALM010006 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI JAEGER, STEFAN · 2017 to 2020
$2.6M
MalariaScreener: image analysis and machine learning for detecting malaria in blood film ZICLM010006 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI JAEGER, STEFAN · 2016 to 2016
$343k
Intramural NIH HHS ZIC LM010006Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malaria remains a major burden on global health, with roughly 200 million cases worldwide and more than 400,000 deaths per year. Besides biomedical research and political efforts, modern information technology is playing a key role in many attempts at fighting the disease. One of the barriers toward a successful mortality reduction has been inadequate malaria diagnosis in particular. To improve diagnosis, image analysis software and machine learning methods have been used to quantify parasitemia in microscopic blood slides. This article gives an overview of these techniques and discusses the current developments in image analysis and machine learning for microscopic malaria diagnosis. We organize the different approaches published in the literature according to the techniques used for imaging, image preprocessing, parasite detection and cell segmentation, feature computation, and automatic cell classification. Readers will find the different techniques listed in tables, with the relevant articles cited next to them, for both thin and thick blood smear images. We also discussed the latest developments in sections devoted to deep learning and smartphone technology for future malaria diagnosis.

Indexed as

Machine LearningBlood SedimentationHumansMalariaSmartphoneStaining and Labeling

Identifiers

PMID29360430
PMCPMC5840030
OpenAlexW2783699776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.