Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29772013›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Rapid differentiation of epithelial cell types in aged biological samples using autofluorescence and morphological signatures.

Emily R Brocato, M Katherine Philpott, Catherine C Connon, Christopher J Ehrhardt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Emily R BrocatoDepartment of Forensic Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States of America.
M Katherine PhilpottDepartment of Forensic Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States of America.
Catherine C ConnonDepartment of Forensic Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States of America.
Christopher J EhrhardtDepartment of Forensic Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4909-0532
Virginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

Virus Vector Shared ResourceP30CA016059 · NCI · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI Keri R Maher · 1985 to 2026
$51.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016059
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Establishing the tissue source of epithelial cells within a biological sample is an important capability for forensic laboratories. In this study we used Imaging Flow Cytometry (IFC) to analyze individual cells recovered from buccal, epidermal, and vaginal samples that had been dried between 24 hours and more than eight weeks. Measurements capturing the size, shape, and fluorescent properties of cells were collected in an automated manner and then used to build a multivariate statistical framework for differentiating cells based on tissue type. Results showed that epidermal cells could be distinguished from vaginal and buccal cells using a discriminant function analysis of IFC measurements with an average classification accuracy of ~94%. Ultimately, cellular measurements such as these, which can be obtained non-destructively, may provide probative information for many types of biological samples and complement results from standard genetic profiling techniques.

Indexed as

Epidermal CellsCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedCell SizeEpithelial CellsFemaleFlow CytometryHumansMaleMouthOptical ImagingSpecimen Handling

Identifiers

PMID29772013
PMCPMC5957390
OpenAlexW2803692460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.