ArticleJournal of neuroscience methods2020
Out-of-focus brain image detection in serial tissue sections.
Article in Journal of neuroscience methods, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA large part of image processing workflow in brain imaging is quality control which is typically done visually. One of the most time consuming steps of the quality control process is classifying an image as in-focus or out-of-focus (OOF). NEW
methodIn this paper we introduce an automated way of identifying OOF brain images from serial tissue sections in large datasets (>1.5 PB). The method utilizes steerable filters (STF) to derive a focus value (FV) for each image. The FV combined with an outlier detection that applies a dynamic threshold allows for the focus classification of the images.
resultsThe method was tested by comparing the results of our algorithm with a visual inspection of the same images. The results support that the method works extremely well by successfully identifying OOF images within serial tissue sections with a minimal number of false positives. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING
methodsOur algorithm was also compared to other methods and metrics and successfully tested in different stacks of images consisting solely of simulated OOF images in order to demonstrate the applicability of the method to other large datasets.
conclusionsWe have presented a practical method to distinguish OOF images from large datasets that include serial tissue sections that can be included in an automated pre-processing image analysis pipeline.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.