Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32747665›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Deep Learning-Based Quantification of Pulmonary Hemosiderophages in Cytology Slides.

Christian Marzahl, Marc Aubreville, Christof A Bertram, Jason Stayt, Anne-Katherine Jasensky, Florian Bartenschlager, Marco Fragoso-Garcia, Ann K Barton, Svenja Elsemann, Samir Jabari and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Artificial intelligence-enabled histological analysis in pre-clinical respiratory disease models: a scoping review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Christian MarzahlPattern Recognition Lab, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. c.marzahl@euroimmun.de.
Marc AubrevillePattern Recognition Lab, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5294-5247
Christof A BertramInstitute of Veterinary Pathology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jason StaytVetPath Laboratory Services, Ascot, Western, Australia.
Anne-Katherine JasenskyLaboklin GmbH und Co. KG, Bad Kissingen, Germany.
Florian BartenschlagerInstitute of Veterinary Pathology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Marco Fragoso-GarciaInstitute of Veterinary Pathology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ann K BartonEquine Clinic, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Svenja ElsemannDepartment of Neurosurgery, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Samir JabariInstitute of Neuropathology, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Jens KrauthResearch and Development, EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG, Lübeck, Germany.
Prathmesh MadhuPattern Recognition Lab, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Jörn VoigtResearch and Development, EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG, Lübeck, Germany.
Jenny HillVetPath Laboratory Services, Ascot, Western, Australia.
Robert KlopfleischInstitute of Veterinary Pathology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6308-0568
Andreas MaierPattern Recognition Lab, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9550-5284
Freie Universität Berlin · DEFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEEuroimmun Medizinische Labordiagnostika (Germany) · DELaboklin (Germany) · DEUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH) is a common condition in sport horses with negative impact on performance. Cytology of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid by use of a scoring system is considered the most sensitive diagnostic method. Macrophages are classified depending on the degree of cytoplasmic hemosiderin content. The current gold standard is manual grading, which is however monotonous and time-consuming. We evaluated state-of-the-art deep learning-based methods for single cell macrophage classification and compared them against the performance of nine cytology experts and evaluated inter- and intra-observer variability. Additionally, we evaluated object detection methods on a novel data set of 17 completely annotated cytology whole slide images (WSI) containing 78,047 hemosiderophages. Our deep learning-based approach reached a concordance of 0.85, partially exceeding human expert concordance (0.68 to 0.86, mean of 0.73, SD of 0.04). Intra-observer variability was high (0.68 to 0.88) and inter-observer concordance was moderate (Fleiss' kappa = 0.67). Our object detection approach has a mean average precision of 0.66 over the five classes from the whole slide gigapixel image and a computation time of below two minutes. To mitigate the high inter- and intra-rater variability, we propose our automated object detection pipeline, enabling accurate, reproducible and quick EIPH scoring in WSI.

Indexed as

Cytological TechniquesDeep LearningAnimalsHemorrhageHorsesLung DiseasesSingle-Cell Analysis

Identifiers

PMID32747665
PMCPMC7398908
OpenAlexW2969006796

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.