ReviewJournal of microscopy2026
Reviewing reproducibility and replicability in 'Deconstructing gastrulation at single-cell resolution' by Stern et al. (2022).
Review in Journal of microscopy, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitative analysis of embryonic morphogenesis often requires handling terabyte-scale 4D microscopy datasets, posing major computational and methodological challenges. Such analyses involve complex workflows for image restoration, segmentation, and tracking of thousands of cells in 3D, sometimes assembled from multiple generic tools and custom scripts. In their study 'Deconstructing gastrulation at single-cell resolution,' the authors present an integrated computational framework for cell segmentation, tracking and modelling of cell-cell interactions during Drosophila gastrulation. Their approach combines both generic tools such as ilastik, FIJI, Cellpose, MATLAB code and tools such as ImSAnE to reconstruct whole-embryo, single-cell morphogenetic atlas with unprecedented detail. While the methodology is transparent and well-documented, its implementation relies on multiple software environments and some non-open-source components, limiting full reproducibility and generalisability. Nevertheless, their 'computational framework' exemplifies rigorous data sharing, clear documentation, and methodological transparency aligned with several community guidelines for reproducible image analysis. We discuss this work in the context of reproducibility, replicability, generalisability, transparency, validity, and robustness, emphasising how emerging open-source and popular solutions could improve accessibility and replicability of similar large-scale bioimage analysis workflows in developmental biology.
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.