ArticleCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases2025
Article in Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computer vision methods offer great potential for rapid image-based identification of medically important arthropod specimens. However, imaging large numbers of specimens is time consuming, and it is difficult to achieve the high image quality required for machine learning models. Conventional imaging methods for identifying and digitizing arthropods, such as insects and spiders, use a stereomicroscope or macro lenses with a camera. This method is challenging due to the narrow field of view, especially when large numbers of arthropods need to be processed. In this paper, we present a high-throughput scanner-based method for capturing images of arthropods that can be used to generate large datasets suitable for training machine learning algorithms for identification. We demonstrate the ability of this approach to image arthropod samples collected with different sampling methods, such as sticky traps (unbaited, in different colors), baited mosquito traps as used by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and BioGents-Sentinel (BGS), and UV light traps with a sticky pad. Using different strategies to place the arthropods on a charge-coupled device (CCD) flatbed scanner and optimized settings that balance processing time and image quality, we captured high-resolution images of various arthropods and obtained morphological details with resolution and magnification similar to a stereomicroscope. We validate the method by comparing the performance of three different deep learning models (InceptionV3, ResNet and MobileNetV2) on two different datasets, namely the scanned images from this study and the images captured with a camera of a stereomicroscope. The results show that the performance of the models trained on the two datasets is not significantly different, indicating that the quality of the scanned images is comparable to that of a stereomicroscope.
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.