Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34881095›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2021

QuPath Digital Immunohistochemical Analysis of Placental Tissue.

Ashley L Hein, Maheswari Mukherjee, Geoffrey A Talmon, Sathish Kumar Natarajan, Tara M Nordgren, Elizabeth Lyden, Corrine K Hanson, Jesse L Cox, Annelisse Santiago-Pintado, Mariam A Molani and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Human Meningiomas Reveal No Evidence of Neuroendocrine Differentiation.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2026
    Article
  3. Cancer communications (London, England) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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.

Ashley L HeinDepartment of Pathology and Microbiology, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Maheswari MukherjeeDepartment of Medical Sciences, College of Allied Health Professions, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Geoffrey A TalmonDepartment of Pathology and Microbiology, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Sathish Kumar NatarajanDepartment of Nutrition and Health Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA.
Tara M NordgrenDivision of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA.
Elizabeth LydenDepartment of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Corrine K HansonDivision of Medical Nutrition Education College of Allied Health Professions, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Jesse L CoxDepartment of Pathology and Microbiology, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Annelisse Santiago-PintadoDepartment of Pathology and Microbiology, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Mariam A MolaniUniversity of Texas-Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Matthew Van OrmerDepartment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Maranda ThompsonDepartment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Melissa ThoeneDepartment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Aunum AkhterDepartment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Ann Anderson-BerryDepartment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Ana G Yuil-ValdesDepartment of Pathology and Microbiology, College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuPath is an open-source digital image analyzer notable for its user-friendly design, cross-platform compatibility, and customizable functionality. Since it was first released in 2016, at least 624 publications have reported its use, and it has been applied in a wide spectrum of settings. However, there are currently limited reports of its use in placental tissue. Here, we present the use of QuPath to quantify staining of G-protein coupled receptor 18 (GPR18), the receptor for the pro-resolving lipid mediator Resolvin D2, in placental tissue.

methodsWhole slide images of vascular smooth muscle (VSM) and extravillous trophoblast (EVT) cells stained for GPR18 were annotated for areas of interest. Visual scoring was performed on these images by trained and in-training pathologists, while QuPath scoring was performed with the methodology described herein.

resultsBland-Altman analyses showed that, for the VSM category, the two methods were comparable across all staining levels. For EVT cells, the high-intensity staining level was comparable across methods, but the medium and low staining levels were not comparable.

conclusionsDigital image analysis programs offer great potential to revolutionize pathology practice and research by increasing accuracy and decreasing the time and cost of analysis. Careful study is needed to optimize this methodology further.

Indexed as

Digital pathologyG-protein coupled receptor 18image analysisplacentaQuPathwhole slide image

Identifiers

PMID34881095
PMCPMC8609285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.