ArticlePloS one2021
Detection and classification of neurons and glial cells in the MADM mouse brain using RetinaNet.
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 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spiner, deep learning-based automated detection of spiral ganglion neurons in intact cochleae.iScience · 2025Article
- Perineuronal Net Microscopy: From Brain Pathology to Artificial Intelligence.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- COMBINe enables automated detection and classification of neurons and astrocytes in tissue-cleared mouse brains.Cell reports methods · 2023Article
- Illumination angle correction during image acquisition in light-sheet fluorescence microscopy using deep learning.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to automatically detect and classify populations of cells in tissue sections is paramount in a wide variety of applications ranging from developmental biology to pathology. Although deep learning algorithms are widely applied to microscopy data, they typically focus on segmentation which requires extensive training and labor-intensive annotation. Here, we utilized object detection networks (neural networks) to detect and classify targets in complex microscopy images, while simplifying data annotation. To this end, we used a RetinaNet model to classify genetically labeled neurons and glia in the brains of Mosaic Analysis with Double Markers (MADM) mice. Our initial RetinaNet-based model achieved an average precision of 0.90 across six classes of cells differentiated by MADM reporter expression and their phenotype (neuron or glia). However, we found that a single RetinaNet model often failed when encountering dense and saturated glial clusters, which show high variability in their shape and fluorophore densities compared to neurons. To overcome this, we introduced a second RetinaNet model dedicated to the detection of glia clusters. Merging the predictions of the two computational models significantly improved the automated cell counting of glial clusters. The proposed cell detection workflow will be instrumental in quantitative analysis of the spatial organization of cellular populations, which is applicable not only to preparations in neuroscience studies, but also to any tissue preparation containing labeled populations of cells.
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.