ArticleJournal of biological engineering2026
Microfluidics-based cell recognition through optimizing suspended cell staining techniques and artificial intelligence.
Article in Journal of biological engineering, 2026. 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
Abstract
purposeBlood staining is necessary to differentiate between its various cells. It is typically performed on a microscopic slide that contains a blood film. However, in some applications, there is a need to stain blood in suspension.
methodsThree techniques were optimized (Romanowsky stains, Hematoxylin stain, and our proposed modified Romanowsky stain) for cell staining before injection into a microfluidic device. Images of stained cells in the microfluidic device were captured under an optical microscope. The effectiveness of staining techniques in cell differentiation was evaluated using color-based k-means clustering. Then, four pre-trained models (Alexnet, VGG16, Resnet, and Densnet) were applied to extract features and classify RBCs, WBCs, and CTCs.
resultsOnly images showing clear cell borders were retained. The models achieved high testing accuracy, reaching 100%, 98%, 98%, and 95.34%, respectively.
conclusionsThis high accuracy was achieved without the use of fluorescence labeling or expensive materials, thereby preserving the cells alive. Based on these results, the proposed staining technique was the most effective in differentiating between WBCs, RBCs, and CTCs, where all WBCs and RBCs were classified correctly.
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.