Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33731967›Full record

ArticleActa histochemica et cytochemica2021

Comparative Analysis of Immunohistochemical Staining Intensity Determined by Light Microscopy, ImageJ and QuPath in Placental Hofbauer Cells.

Katerina Cizkova, Tereza Foltynkova, Mariam Gachechiladze, Zdenek Tauber

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta histochemica et cytochemica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 106 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Katerina CizkovaDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University, 779 00, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Tereza FoltynkovaDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University, 779 00, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Mariam GachechiladzeDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Pathology & Laboratory of Molecular Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University, 779 00, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Zdenek TauberDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University, 779 00, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Palacký University Olomouc · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Software based analyses of immunohistochemical staining are designed for obtaining quantitative, reproducible, and objective data. However, often times only a certain type of positive cells or structures need to be quantified thus whole image analysis cannot be performed. Such an example is Hofbauer placental cells, which show positivity of some antigens together with trophoblast, but only Hofbauer cells represent the regions of interest (ROIs). Two independent observers evaluated the immunohistochemical staining intensity of Hofbauer cells in placenta samples stained for cytoplasmic antigens by ImageJ, QuPath and light microscopy. Thus, the precise manual determination of ROIs, i.e. Hofbauer cells, was necessary. We detected low inter-observer variability in staining intensity. Almost perfect agreement between observers was reached for ImageJ and QuPath whilst substantial agreement was reached for light microscopy evaluation. As for the comparison of ImageJ, QuPath and light microscopy, the agreement of all three methods (identical immunohistochemical intensity) was achieved for 38.1% samples. The almost perfect agreement of staining intensities was reached between ImageJ and QuPath, and moderate agreement for comparison of the light microscopy to both software. Software analyses are much more time-consuming, thus their utilization is at least questionable to evaluate ROIs with selection.

Indexed as

image analysisimmunohistochemical staining evaluationinter-observer variability

Identifiers

PMID33731967
PMCPMC7947637
OpenAlexW3130870680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.