Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39250489›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Optimization of whole slide imaging scan settings for computer vision using human lung cancer tissue.

Melvin Geubbelmans, Jari Claes, Kim Nijsten, Pascal Gervois, Simon Appeltans, Sandrina Martens, Esther Wolfs, Michiel Thomeer, Dirk Valkenborg, Christel Faes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Melvin GeubbelmansData Science Institute, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1975-7698
Jari ClaesData Science Institute, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Kim NijstenUHasselt, Lab for Functional Imaging & Research on Stem Cells (FIERCE Lab), BIOMED, Diepenbeek, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8085-8311
Pascal GervoisUHasselt, Lab for Functional Imaging & Research on Stem Cells (FIERCE Lab), BIOMED, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Simon AppeltansData Science Institute, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Sandrina MartensUHasselt, Lab for Functional Imaging & Research on Stem Cells (FIERCE Lab), BIOMED, Diepenbeek, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3421-2581
Esther WolfsUHasselt, Lab for Functional Imaging & Research on Stem Cells (FIERCE Lab), BIOMED, Diepenbeek, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9277-6524
Michiel ThomeerUHasselt, Limburg Clinical Research Center (LCRC), Hasselt, Belgium.
Dirk ValkenborgData Science Institute, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Christel FaesData Science Institute, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1878-9869

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital pathology has become increasingly popular for research and clinical applications. Using high-quality microscopes to produce Whole Slide Images of tumor tissue enables the discovery of insights into biological aspects invisible to the human eye. These are acquired through downstream analyses using spatial statistics and artificial intelligence. Determination of the quality and consistency of these images is needed to ensure accurate outcomes when identifying clinical and subclinical image features. Additionally, the time-intensive process of generating high-volume images results in a trade-off that needs to be carefully balanced. This study aims to determine optimal instrument settings to generate representative images of pathological tissue using digital microscopy. Using various settings, an H&E stained sample was scanned using the ZEISS Axio Scan.Z1. Next, nucleus segmentation was performed on resulting images using StarDist. Subsequently, detections were compared between scans using a matching algorithm. Finally, nucleus-level information was compared between scans. Results indicated that while general matching percentages were high, similarity between information from replicates was relatively low. Additionally, settings resulting in longer scanning times and increased data volume did not increase similarity between replicates. In conclusion, the scan setting ultimately deemed optimal combined consistent and qualitative performance with low throughput time.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsAlgorithmsCell NucleusHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicroscopy

Identifiers

PMID39250489
PMCPMC11383235

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.