Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38435563›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2024

Blood cell image segmentation and classification: a systematic review.

Muhammad Shahzad, Farman Ali, Syed Hamad Shirazi, Assad Rasheed, Awais Ahmad, Babar Shah, Daehan Kwak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Revolutionizing diagnosis of pulmonaryFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Muhammad Shahzad *Department of Computer Science and Information Technology, Hazara University, Mansehra, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0003-4971-4875
Farman Ali *Department of Computer Science and Engineering, School of Convergence, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9420-1588
Syed Hamad ShiraziDepartment of Computer Science and Information Technology, Hazara University, Mansehra, Pakistan.
Assad RasheedDepartment of Computer Science and Information Technology, Hazara University, Mansehra, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0002-5027-067X
Awais AhmadCentre for Excellence in Information Technology, Institute of Management Sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Babar ShahCollege of Technological Innovation, Zayed University, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Daehan KwakDepartment of Computer Science and Technology, Kean University, Union, NJ, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5614-0190

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Blood diseases such as leukemia, anemia, lymphoma, and thalassemia are hematological disorders that relate to abnormalities in the morphology and concentration of blood elements, specifically white blood cells (WBC) and red blood cells (RBC). Accurate and efficient diagnosis of these conditions significantly depends on the expertise of hematologists and pathologists. To assist the pathologist in the diagnostic process, there has been growing interest in utilizing computer-aided diagnostic (CAD) techniques, particularly those using medical image processing and machine learning algorithms. Previous surveys in this domain have been narrowly focused, often only addressing specific areas like segmentation or classification but lacking a holistic view like segmentation, classification, feature extraction, dataset utilization, evaluation matrices, Methodology: This survey aims to provide a comprehensive and systematic review of existing literature and research work in the field of blood image analysis using deep learning techniques. It particularly focuses on medical image processing techniques and deep learning algorithms that excel in the morphological characterization of WBCs and RBCs. The review is structured to cover four main areas: segmentation techniques, classification methodologies, descriptive feature selection, evaluation parameters, and dataset selection for the analysis of WBCs and RBCs. Results: Our analysis reveals several interesting trends and preferences among researchers. Regarding dataset selection, approximately 50% of research related to WBC segmentation and 60% for RBC segmentation opted for manually obtaining images rather than using a predefined dataset. When it comes to classification, 45% of the previous work on WBCs chose the ALL-IDB dataset, while a significant 73% of researchers focused on RBC classification decided to manually obtain images from medical institutions instead of utilizing predefined datasets. In terms of feature selection for classification, morphological features were the most popular, being chosen in 55% and 80% of studies related to WBC and RBC classification, respectively. Conclusion: The diagnostic accuracy for blood-related diseases like leukemia, anemia, lymphoma, and thalassemia can be significantly enhanced through the effective use of CAD techniques, which have evolved considerably in recent years. This survey provides a broad and in-depth review of the techniques being employed, from image segmentation to classification, feature selection, utilization of evaluation matrices, and dataset selection. The inconsistency in dataset selection suggests a need for standardized, high-quality datasets to strengthen the diagnostic capabilities of these techniques further. Additionally, the popularity of morphological features indicates that future research could further explore and innovate in this direction.

Indexed as

ClassificationMorphological featuresRed blood cellSegmentationWhite blood cell

Identifiers

PMID38435563
PMCPMC10909159

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.