Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38641688›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Classification and counting of cells in brightfield microscopy images: an application of convolutional neural networks.

E K G D Ferreira, G F Silveira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

2 authors.

E K G D FerreiraCarlos Chagas Institute, Curitiba, PR, CEP 81310-020, Brazil.
G F SilveiraCarlos Chagas Institute, Curitiba, PR, CEP 81310-020, Brazil. gfsilveira@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microscopy is integral to medical research, facilitating the exploration of various biological questions, notably cell quantification. However, this process's time-consuming and error-prone nature, attributed to human intervention or automated methods usually applied to fluorescent images, presents challenges. In response, machine learning algorithms have been integrated into microscopy, automating tasks and constructing predictive models from vast datasets. These models adeptly learn representations for object detection, image segmentation, and target classification. An advantageous strategy involves utilizing unstained images, preserving cell integrity and enabling morphology-based classification-something hindered when fluorescent markers are used. The aim is to introduce a model proficient in classifying distinct cell lineages in digital contrast microscopy images. Additionally, the goal is to create a predictive model identifying lineage and determining optimal quantification of cell numbers. Employing a CNN machine learning algorithm, a classification model predicting cellular lineage achieved a remarkable accuracy of 93%, with ROC curve results nearing 1.0, showcasing robust performance. However, some lineages, namely SH-SY5Y (78%), HUH7_mayv (85%), and A549 (88%), exhibited slightly lower accuracies. These outcomes not only underscore the model's quality but also emphasize CNNs' potential in addressing the inherent complexities of microscopic images.

Indexed as

MicroscopyNeuroblastomaAlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerCell lineagesCNNsMachine learningMicroscopic image

Identifiers

PMID38641688
PMCPMC11031575

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.