Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39156668›Full record

ArticleData in brief2024

An annotated image dataset of pests on different coloured sticky traps acquired with different imaging devices.

Song-Quan Ong, Toke Thomas Høye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Data in brief, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2025
    Article
  3. 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.

Song-Quan OngDepartment of Ecoscience Aarhus University, C. F. Møllers Allé 8, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
Toke Thomas HøyeDepartment of Ecoscience Aarhus University, C. F. Møllers Allé 8, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sticky trap is probably the most cost-effective tool for catching insect pests, but the identification and counting of insects on sticky traps is very labour-intensive. When investigating the automatic identification and counting of pests on sticky traps using computer vision and machine learning, two aspects can strongly influence the performance of the model - the colour of the sticky trap and the device used to capture the images of the pests on the sticky trap. As far as we know, there are no available image datasets to study these two aspects in computer vision and deep learning algorithms. Therefore, this paper presents a new dataset consisting of images of two pests commonly found in post-harvest crops - the red flour beetle (

Indexed as

Automated pest monitoringGlue trapInsect monitoringIntegrated pest management

Identifiers

PMID39156668
PMCPMC11327826

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.