ArticleScientific reports2026
Learning precise segmentation of neurofibrillary tangles from rapid manual point annotations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- From Single-Modal to Multi-Modal Artificial Intelligence in Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review of Databases, Modalities, Diagnostic Performance, and Clinical Translation Challenges.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Digital neuropathology of neurodegenerative disorders: Foundations, research advances, and future directions.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Review
- Comparison of multiple quantitative strategies for neuropathologic image analyses.Journal of neuropathology and experimental neurology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accumulation of abnormal tau protein into neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) is a pathologic hallmark of Alzheimer disease (AD). Accurate detection of NFTs in tissue samples can reveal relationships with clinical, demographic, and genetic features through deep phenotyping. However, expert manual analysis is time-consuming, subject to observer variability, and cannot handle the data amounts generated by modern imaging. We present a scalable, open-source, deep-learning approach to quantify NFT burden in digital whole slide images (WSIs) of post-mortem human brain tissue. To achieve this, we developed a method to generate detailed NFT boundaries directly from single-point-per-NFT annotations. We then trained a semantic segmentation model on 45 annotated 2400 μm by 1200 μm regions of interest (ROIs) selected from 15 unique temporal cortex WSIs of AD cases from three institutions (University of California (UC)-Davis, UC-San Diego, and Columbia University). Segmenting NFTs at the single-pixel level, the model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.832 and an F1 of 0.527 (196-fold over random) on a held-out test set of 664 NFTs from 20 ROIs (7 WSIs). We compared this to deep object detection, which achieved comparable but coarser-grained performance that was 60% faster. The segmentation and object detection models correlated well with expert semi-quantitative scores at the whole-slide level (Spearman's rho ρ = 0.654 (p = 6.50e-5) and ρ = 0.513 (p = 3.18e-3), respectively). We openly release this multi-institution deep-learning pipeline to provide detailed NFT spatial distribution and morphology analysis capability at a scale otherwise infeasible by manual assessment.
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.