ArticleScientific reports2024
Automated quantification of avian influenza virus antigen in different organs.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- In vivo inhibition of JAK-STAT signalling enhances high pathogenicity influenza virus replication in ducks.The Journal of general virology · 2026Article
- Type of diet has no major influence on inflammatory response in a Saddleback pig model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As immunohistochemistry is valuable for determining tissue and cell tropism of avian influenza viruses (AIV), but time-consuming, an artificial intelligence-based workflow was developed to automate the AIV antigen quantification. Organ samples from experimental AIV infections including brain, heart, lung and spleen on one slide, and liver and kidney on another slide were stained for influenza A-matrixprotein and analyzed with QuPath: Random trees algorithms were trained to identify the organs on each slide, followed by threshold-based quantification of the immunoreactive area. The algorithms were trained and tested on two different slide sets, then retrained on both and validated on a third set. Except for the kidney, the best algorithms for organ selection correctly identified the largest proportion of the organ area. For most organs, the immunoreactive area assessed following organ selection was significantly and positively correlated to a manually assessed semiquantitative score. In the validation set, intravenously infected chickens showed a generally higher percentage of immunoreactive area than chickens infected oculonasally. Variability between the slide sets and a similar tissue texture of some organs limited the ability of the algorithms to select certain organs. Generally, suitable correlations of the immunoreactivity data results were achieved, facilitating high-throughput analysis of AIV tissue tropism.
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.