ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Deep learning applications in parasite microscopy: A scoping review.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParasitic diseases remain a significant contributor to the global burden of disease and conventional microscopy remains the gold standard for parasite detection. However, it is labour-intensive and dependent on skilled personnel, leading to variability in diagnostic accuracy. Recent advances in deep learning have enabled automated analysis of microscopy images, offering potential improvements in diagnostic efficiency and consistency. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsThis scoping review aimed to map current evidence on deep learning applications in parasite microscopy for human clinical diagnosis. A systematic search of seven electronic databases was conducted for studies published between January 2015 and July 2025. Eligible studies included primary research that applied deep learning models to parasite microscopy images and reported performance metrics. A total of 118 studies were included. Image classification was the most commonly reported task, followed by object detection, while image segmentation was less frequently investigated. A wide range of architectures was used, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs), YOLO-based detection models and hybrid approaches. Most studies reported high performance across tasks, however, direct comparison was limited due to heterogeneity in datasets, evaluation metrics and experimental designs. In addition, most studies relied on internal validation using subsets of the same dataset, with limited external validation. Among the studies included in this review, several proposed implementation strategies. However, relatively few reported implementation or evaluation in real-world clinical or diagnostic laboratory settings. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Deep learning demonstrates substantial potential for automated parasite detection in microscopy. Among the studies included in this review, most deep learning models were evaluated under experimental conditions, with relatively few reporting implementation or evaluation in clinical or diagnostic laboratory settings. Key challenges include dataset heterogeneity, lack of standardised evaluation and limited real-world validation. Future research should prioritise external validation and implementation-focused studies to support integration into clinical and laboratory workflows.
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.