Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34234376›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

A simple and robust method for automating analysis of naïve and regenerating peripheral nerves.

Alison L Wong, Nicholas Hricz, Harsha Malapati, Nicholas von Guionneau, Michael Wong, Thomas Harris, Mathieu Boudreau, Julien Cohen-Adad, Sami Tuffaha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Nerve Tape Is an Effective Tool for Small Nerve Repair.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Alison L WongDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0414-0556
Nicholas HriczDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4156-5748
Harsha MalapatiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.
Nicholas von GuionneauDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9819-221X
Michael WongDepartment of Anesthesia, Dalhousie University Faculty of Medicine, Pain Management & Perioperative Medicine, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9697-9799
Thomas HarrisDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.
Mathieu BoudreauNeuroPoly Lab, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Julien Cohen-AdadNeuroPoly Lab, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3662-9532
Sami TuffahaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundManual axon histomorphometry (AH) is time- and resource-intensive, which has inspired many attempts at automation. However, there has been little investigation on implementation of automated programs for widespread use. Ideally such a program should be able to perform AH across imaging modalities and nerve states. AxonDeepSeg (ADS) is an open source deep learning program that has previously been validated in electron microscopy. We evaluated the robustness of ADS for peripheral nerve axonal histomorphometry in light micrographs prepared using two different methods.

methodsAxon histomorphometry using ADS and manual analysis (gold-standard) was performed on light micrographs of naïve or regenerating rat median nerve cross-sections prepared with either toluidine-resin or osmium-paraffin embedding protocols. The parameters of interest included axon count, axon diameter, myelin thickness, and g-ratio.

resultsManual and automatic ADS axon counts demonstrated good agreement in naïve nerves and moderate agreement on regenerating nerves. There were small but consistent differences in measured axon diameter, myelin thickness and g-ratio; however, absolute differences were small. Both methods appropriately identified differences between naïve and regenerating nerves. ADS was faster than manual axon analysis.

conclusionsWithout any algorithm retraining, ADS was able to appropriately identify critical differences between naïve and regenerating nerves and work with different sample preparation methods of peripheral nerve light micrographs. While there were differences between absolute values between manual and ADS, ADS performed consistently and required much less time. ADS is an accessible and robust tool for AH that can provide consistent analysis across protocols and nerve states.

Indexed as

AxonsNerve RegenerationPeripheral NervesAnimalsAutomationDeep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMedian NerveMyelin SheathRats

Identifiers

PMID34234376
PMCPMC8263263

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.