Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31386281›Full record

ArticleJournal of biophotonics2019

Convolutional neural networks for reconstruction of undersampled optical projection tomography data applied to in vivo imaging of zebrafish.

Samuel P X Davis, Sunil Kumar, Yuriy Alexandrov, Ajay Bhargava, Gabriela da Silva Xavier, Guy A Rutter, Paul Frankel, Erik Sahai, Seth Flaxman, Paul M W French and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biophotonics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Optical projection tomography implemented for accessibility and low cost (Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Samuel P X DavisDepartment of Physics, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0871-8880
Sunil KumarDepartment of Physics, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Yuriy AlexandrovDepartment of Physics, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ajay BhargavaThe Francis Crick Institute, London, UK.
Gabriela da Silva XavierDepartment of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0678-012X
Guy A RutterDepartment of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6360-0343
Paul FrankelDivision of Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Erik SahaiThe Francis Crick Institute, London, UK.
Seth FlaxmanDepartment of Mathematics and Data Science Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2477-4217
Paul M W FrenchDepartment of Physics, Imperial College London, London, UK.
James McGintyDepartment of Physics, Imperial College London, London, UK.
The Francis Crick Institute · GBImperial College London · GBNIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/16/41/32235British Heart Foundation SP/08/004Cancer Research UK FC001144Medical Research Council MR/J0003042/1Medical Research Council MR/K001981/1Medical Research Council MR/K011561/1Medical Research Council MR/K023667/1Medical Research Council MR/L02036X/1Medical Research Council MR/M012646/1Medical Research Council MR/N020472/1Medical Research Council MR/R010676/1Medical Research Council MR/R022259/1Wellcome Trust FC001144
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optical projection tomography (OPT) is a 3D mesoscopic imaging modality that can utilize absorption or fluorescence contrast. 3D images can be rapidly reconstructed from tomographic data sets sampled with sufficient numbers of projection angles using the Radon transform, as is typically implemented with optically cleared samples of the mm-to-cm scale. For in vivo imaging, considerations of phototoxicity and the need to maintain animals under anesthesia typically preclude the acquisition of OPT data at a sufficient number of angles to avoid artifacts in the reconstructed images. For sparse samples, this can be addressed with iterative algorithms to reconstruct 3D images from undersampled OPT data, but the data processing times present a significant challenge for studies imaging multiple animals. We show here that convolutional neural networks (CNN) can be used in place of iterative algorithms to remove artifacts-reducing processing time for an undersampled in vivo zebrafish dataset from 77 to 15 minutes. We also show that using CNN produces reconstructions of equivalent quality to compressed sensing with 40% fewer projections. We further show that diverse training data classes, for example, ex vivo mouse tissue data, can be used for CNN-based reconstructions of OPT data of other species including live zebrafish.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerTomography, OpticalAnimalsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLungMicePancreasZebrafishneural networksoptical tomographypreclinical imaging

Identifiers

PMID31386281
PMCPMC7065643
OpenAlexW2966077510

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.