ReviewJournal of advanced research2026
Bridging traditional and deep learning methods in H&E histological image normalization: a comprehensive review and introducing a novel framework for comparative analyses.
Review in Journal of advanced research, 2026. 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.
- NucFuseRank: Dataset Fusion and Performance Ranking for Nuclei Instance Segmentation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Structure over color: Diagnostic information in H&E images resides primarily in grayscale.Journal of pathology informatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHistology images are a cornerstone of pathology, which allow automated analysis for disease diagnosis. However, variations in staining and image acquisition processes significantly affect the performance of these algorithms. Histology image normalization is method to achieve uniformity in image color distributions, which will enhance the accuracy and consistency of automated analysis. AIM OF REVIEW: This review was conducted with the aim of assessing normalization methods and comparing them in an empirical manner to help researchers choose the most appropriate method for their study. It also aims to assist academics and professionals involved in automated image analysis and digital pathology. KEY SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS OF REVIEW: This review categorizes normalization techniques into four groups: deep learning-based approaches (e.g., GANs, autoencoders, diffusion models), traditional methods (e.g., deconvolution, histogram matching), hybrid models, and a novel signal processing-based method. It also introduces a new deep learning framework for evaluating normalization strategies and experimentally compares eight state-of-the-art methods on histopathology images. The results highlight the strengths and limitations of each approach, helping researchers and professionals choose suitable methods for their needs. In addition, the review emphasizes the impact of color variation on the accuracy of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems and the importance of preserving biological information during normalization. Finally, it outlines directions for future research, including integrating normalization with data augmentation and exploring information preservation beyond cancer subtype.
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.