ArticleMicron (Oxford, England : 1993)2022
Discrete protein metric (DPM): A new image similarity metric to calculate accuracy of deep learning-generated cell focal adhesion predictions.
Article in Micron (Oxford, England : 1993), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding cell behaviors can provide new knowledge on the development of different pathologies. Focal adhesion (FA) sites are important sub-cellular structures that are involved in these processes. To better facilitate the study of FA sites, deep learning (DL) can be used to predict FA site morphology based on limited microscopic datasets (e.g., cell membrane images). However, calculating the accuracy score of these predictions can be challenging due to the discrete/point pattern like nature of FA sites. In the present work, a new image similarity metric, discrete protein metric (DPM), was developed to calculate FA prediction accuracy. This metric measures differences in distribution (d), shape/size (s), and angle (a) of FA sites between predicted and ground truth microscopy images. Performance of the DPM was evaluated by comparing it to three other commonly used image similarity metrics: Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC), feature similarity index (FSIM), and Intersection over Union (IoU). A sensitivity analysis was performed by comparing changes in each metric value due to quantifiable changes in FA site location, number, aspect ratio, area, or orientation. Furthermore, accuracy score of DL-generated predictions was calculated using all four metrics to compare their ability to capture variation across samples. Results showed better sensitivity and range of variation for DPM compared to the other metrics tested. Most importantly, DPM had the ability to determine which FA predictions were quantitatively more accurate and consistent with qualitative assessments. The proposed DPM hence provides a method to validate DL-generated FA predictions and has the potential to be used for investigation of other sub-cellular protein aggregates relevant to cell biology.
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.