Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35200434›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Automated Cell Foreground-Background Segmentation with Phase-Contrast Microscopy Images: An Alternative to Machine Learning Segmentation Methods with Small-Scale Data.

Guochang Ye, Mehmet Kaya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Guochang YeDepartment of Biomedical and Chemical Engineering and Sciences, Florida Institute of Technology, 150 W University Blvd, Melbourne, FL 32901, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1185-7267
Mehmet KayaDepartment of Biomedical and Chemical Engineering and Sciences, Florida Institute of Technology, 150 W University Blvd, Melbourne, FL 32901, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0252-9755

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell segmentation is a critical step for image-based experimental analysis. Existing cell segmentation methods are neither entirely automated nor perform well under basic laboratory microscopy. This study proposes an efficient and automated cell segmentation method involving morphological operations to automatically achieve cell segmentation for phase-contrast microscopes. Manual/visual counting of cell segmentation serves as the control group (156 images as ground truth) to evaluate the proposed method's performance. The proposed technology's adaptive performance is assessed at varying conditions, including artificial blurriness, illumination, and image size. Compared to the Trainable Weka Segmentation method, the Empirical Gradient Threshold method, and the ilastik segmentation software, the proposed method achieved better segmentation accuracy (dice coefficient: 90.07, IoU: 82.16%, and 6.51% as the average relative error on measuring cell area). The proposed method also has good reliability, even under unfavored imaging conditions at which manual labeling or human intervention is inefficient. Additionally, similar degrees of segmentation accuracy were confirmed when the ground truth data and the generated data from the proposed method were applied individually to train modified U-Net models (16848 images). These results demonstrated good accuracy and high practicality of the proposed cell segmentation method with phase-contrast microscopy image data.

Indexed as

automationcell culturecomputer visiondeep learningimage analysisoptical microscopy

Identifiers

PMID35200434
PMCPMC8869246

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.