ArticleScientific reports2023
Cell quantification in digital contrast microscopy images with convolutional neural networks algorithm.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A deterministic method for quantifying spindle-shaped cells in noisy bright-field microscopy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Viability classification of unstained cells in microscopic images using deep learning.Applied microscopy · 2026Article
- Classification and counting of cells in brightfield microscopy images: an application of convolutional neural networks.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High Content Screening (HCS) combines high throughput techniques with the ability to generate cellular images of biological systems. The objective of this work is to evaluate the performance of predictive models using CNN to identify the number of cells present in digital contrast microscopy images obtained by HCS. One way to evaluate the algorithm was through the Mean Squared Error metric. The MSE was 4,335.99 in the A549 cell line, 25,295.23 in the Huh7 and 36,897.03 in the 3T3. After obtaining these values, different parameters of the models were changed to verify how they behave. By reducing the number of images, the MSE increased considerably, with the A549 cell line changing to 49,973.52, Huh7 to 79,473.88 and 3T3 to 52,977.05. Correlation analyzes were performed for the different models. In lineage A549, the best model showed a positive correlation with R = 0.953. In Huh7, the best correlation of the model was R = 0.821, it was also a positive correlation. In 3T3, the models showed no correlation, with the best model having R = 0.100. The models performed well in quantifying the number of cells, and the number and quality of the images interfered with this predictive ability.
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.