Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30344991›Full record

ArticleJournal of healthcare engineering2018

Comparative Study on Automated Cell Nuclei Segmentation Methods for Cytology Pleural Effusion Images.

Khin Yadanar Win, Somsak Choomchuay, Kazuhiko Hamamoto, Manasanan Raveesunthornkiat

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of healthcare engineering, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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.

Khin Yadanar WinFaculty of Engineering, King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-7155-9475
Somsak ChoomchuayFaculty of Engineering, King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Bangkok, Thailand.
Kazuhiko HamamotoSchool of Information and Telecommunication Engineering, Tokai University, Tokyo, Japan.
Manasanan RaveesunthornkiatDepartment of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Srinakharinwirot University, Nakhon Nayok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-8776-1010

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automated cell nuclei segmentation is the most crucial step toward the implementation of a computer-aided diagnosis system for cancer cells. Studies on the automated analysis of cytology pleural effusion images are few because of the lack of reliable cell nuclei segmentation methods. Therefore, this paper presents a comparative study of twelve nuclei segmentation methods for cytology pleural effusion images. Each method involves three main steps: preprocessing, segmentation, and postprocessing. The preprocessing and segmentation stages help enhancing the image quality and extracting the nuclei regions from the rest of the image, respectively. The postprocessing stage helps in refining the segmented nuclei and removing false findings. The segmentation methods are quantitatively evaluated for 35 cytology images of pleural effusion by computing five performance metrics. The evaluation results show that the segmentation performances of the Otsu, k-means, mean shift, Chan-Vese, and graph cut methods are 94, 94, 95, 94, and 93%, respectively, with high abnormal nuclei detection rates. The average computational times per image are 1.08, 36.62, 50.18, 330, and 44.03 seconds, respectively. The findings of this study will be useful for current and potential future studies on cytology images of pleural effusion.

Indexed as

Cell NucleusCytological TechniquesAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisCytodiagnosisDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPleural EffusionReproducibility of ResultsSoftware

Identifiers

PMID30344991
PMCPMC6164204

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.