ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Enhanced stem cell image segmentation by leveraging visual processing mechanisms.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to investigate the application of visual information processing mechanisms in the segmentation of stem cell (SC) images. The cognitive principles underlying visual information processing were analyzed, and the limitations of conventional segmentation methods were evaluated using phase-contrast microscopy images of stem cells. Methods: An optimized segmentation method incorporating halo correction was developed to address the limitations of traditional approaches. The performance of the proposed method was experimentally validated and compared with existing techniques. Results: The proposed method achieved segmentation accuracy, recall, precision, and F1-score values of 96.5%, 94.9%, 91.4%, and 93.9%, respectively, outperforming existing approaches. Additionally, the confluency error on the Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells dataset and the C2C12 dataset was 0.07 and 0.05, respectively, indicating superior performance compared to equivalent methods. Conclusion: The findings demonstrate that the proposed method offers enhanced efficacy for stem cell image segmentation tasks.
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.