Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37768797›Full record

ArticleIEEE transactions on medical imaging2023

Current Progress and Challenges in Large-Scale 3D Mitochondria Instance Segmentation.

Daniel Franco-Barranco, Zudi Lin, Won-Dong Jang, Xueying Wang, Qijia Shen, Wenjie Yin, Yutian Fan, Mingxing Li, Chang Chen, Zhiwei Xiong and 17 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE transactions on medical imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

27 authors at 12 institutions in 6 countries.

Daniel Franco-Barranco
Zudi Lin
Won-Dong Jang
Xueying Wang
Qijia Shen
Wenjie Yin
Yutian Fan
Mingxing Li
Chang Chen
Zhiwei Xiong
Rui Xin
Hao Liu
Huai Chen
Zhili Li
Jie Zhao
Xuejin Chen
Constantin Pape
Ryan Conrad
Luke Nightingale
Joost de Folter
Martin L Jones
Yanling Liu
Dorsa Ziaei
Stephan Huschauer
Ignacio Arganda-Carreras
Hanspeter Pfister
Donglai Wei
Harvard University · USUniversity of Science and Technology of China · CNShanghai Jiao Tong University · CNThe Francis Crick Institute · GBFrederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research · USBoston College · USEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory · DEIkerbasque · ESKantonsspital Winterthur · CHNational Institutes of Health · USUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of the Basque Country · ES

Funding

WORK ORDER 126643 B539 EXPAND IC SUITE75N91019D00024 · NIAID · LEIDOS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, INC. · PI BRISCOE, LYNN · 2019 to 2025
$3932.6M
Systems Pharmacology of Therapeutic and Adverse Responses to ImmuneCheckpoint and Small Molecule DrugsU54CA225088 · NCI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI SORGER, PETER KARL · 2018 to 2022
$10.8M
Cancer Research UK FC001999NCI NIH HHS 75N91019D00024NCI NIH HHS U54 CA225088Wellcome Trust FC001999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper, we present the results of the MitoEM challenge on mitochondria 3D instance segmentation from electron microscopy images, organized in conjunction with the IEEE-ISBI 2021 conference. Our benchmark dataset consists of two large-scale 3D volumes, one from human and one from rat cortex tissue, which are 1,986 times larger than previously used datasets. At the time of paper submission, 257 participants had registered for the challenge, 14 teams had submitted their results, and six teams participated in the challenge workshop. Here, we present eight top-performing approaches from the challenge participants, along with our own baseline strategies. Posterior to the challenge, annotation errors in the ground truth were corrected without altering the final ranking. Additionally, we present a retrospective evaluation of the scoring system which revealed that: 1) challenge metric was permissive with the false positive predictions; and 2) size-based grouping of instances did not correctly categorize mitochondria of interest. Thus, we propose a new scoring system that better reflects the correctness of the segmentation results. Although several of the top methods are compared favorably to our own baselines, substantial errors remain unsolved for mitochondria with challenging morphologies. Thus, the challenge remains open for submission and automatic evaluation, with all volumes available for download.

Indexed as

Cerebral CortexMitochondriaAnimalsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicroscopy, ElectronRatsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37768797
PMCPMC10753957
OpenAlexW4387129484

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.