Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36917117›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2023

AxoNet 2.0: A Deep Learning-Based Tool for Morphometric Analysis of Retinal Ganglion Cell Axons.

Vidisha Goyal, A Thomas Read, Matthew D Ritch, Bailey G Hannon, Gabriela Sanchez Rodriguez, Dillon M Brown, Andrew J Feola, Adam Hedberg-Buenz, Grant A Cull, Juan Reynaud and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Tunable dual-AAV sparse labeling of PVFrontiers in neural circuits · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Vidisha GoyalSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
A Thomas ReadWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Matthew D RitchWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Bailey G HannonGeorge W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Gabriela Sanchez RodriguezWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Dillon M BrownWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Andrew J FeolaCenter for Visual and Neurocognitive Rehabilitation, Atlanta VA Healthcare System, Decatur, GA, USA.
Adam Hedberg-BuenzDepartment of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Grant A CullDevers Eye Institute, Legacy Research Institute, Portland, OR, USA.
Juan ReynaudDevers Eye Institute, Legacy Research Institute, Portland, OR, USA.
Mona K GarvinDevers Eye Institute, Legacy Research Institute, Portland, OR, USA.
Michael G AndersonDepartment of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Claude F BurgoyneDevers Eye Institute, Legacy Research Institute, Portland, OR, USA.
C Ross EthierWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Georgia Institute of Technology · USLegacy Health · USUniversity of Iowa · USEmory University · US

Funding

Stem Cell and Organoid CoreP30EY025580 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI Robert Foster Mullins · 2016 to 2026
$6.9M
Diabetes Research Training Program Diversity SupplementT32DK112751 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI Andrew W Norris · 2017 to 2026
$4.8M
VIsion Science Training in AtlantaT32EY007092 · NEI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Machelle T. Pardue · 1985 to 2026
$4.6M
Targeting Scleral Stiffness as a Novel Therapeutic Approach in GlaucomaR01EY025286 · NEI · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI ETHIER, C ROSS · 2015 to 2019
$2.5M
Impact of Menopause on the Aqueous Outflow PathwayR01EY030871 · NEI · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI FEOLA, ANDREW J · 2020 to 2024
$1.6M
The Effect of Estrogen Deficiencies on Vision Loss in GlaucomaIK2RX002342 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI FEOLA, ANDREW J · 2018 to 2023
–
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY025580NEI NIH HHS R01 EY025286NEI NIH HHS R01 EY030871NEI NIH HHS T32 EY007092NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK112751RRD VA IK2 RX002342
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Assessment of glaucomatous damage in animal models is facilitated by rapid and accurate quantification of retinal ganglion cell (RGC) axonal loss and morphologic change. However, manual assessment is extremely time- and labor-intensive. Here, we developed AxoNet 2.0, an automated deep learning (DL) tool that (i) counts normal-appearing RGC axons and (ii) quantifies their morphometry from light micrographs. Methods: A DL algorithm was trained to segment the axoplasm and myelin sheath of normal-appearing axons using manually-annotated rat optic nerve (ON) cross-sectional micrographs. Performance was quantified by various metrics (e.g., soft-Dice coefficient between predicted and ground-truth segmentations). We also quantified axon counts, axon density, and axon size distributions between hypertensive and control eyes and compared to literature reports. Results: AxoNet 2.0 performed very well when compared to manual annotations of rat ON (R2 = 0.92 for automated vs. manual counts, soft-Dice coefficient = 0.81 ± 0.02, mean absolute percentage error in axonal morphometric outcomes < 15%). AxoNet 2.0 also showed promise for generalization, performing well on other animal models (R2 = 0.97 between automated versus manual counts for mice and 0.98 for non-human primates). As expected, the algorithm detected decreased in axon density in hypertensive rat eyes (P ≪ 0.001) with preferential loss of large axons (P < 0.001). Conclusions: AxoNet 2.0 provides a fast and nonsubjective tool to quantify both RGC axon counts and morphological features, thus assisting with assessing axonal damage in animal models of glaucomatous optic neuropathy. Translational Relevance: This deep learning approach will increase rigor of basic science studies designed to investigate RGC axon protection and regeneration.

Indexed as

Deep LearningGlaucomaAnimalsAxonsCross-Sectional StudiesDisease Models, AnimalMiceRatsRetinal Ganglion Cells

Identifiers

PMID36917117
PMCPMC10020950
OpenAlexW4324129702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.