Automating cell detection and classification in human brain fluorescent microscopy images using dictionary learning and sparse coding
Journal of Neuroscience Methods, ISSN: 0165-0270, Vol: 282, Page: 20-33
2017
- 24Citations
- 55Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations24
- Citation Indexes24
- CrossRef24
- 17
- Captures55
- Readers55
- 55
Article Description
Immunofluorescence (IF) plays a major role in quantifying protein expression in situ and understanding cell function. It is widely applied in assessing disease mechanisms and in drug discovery research. Automation of IF analysis can transform studies using experimental cell models. However, IF analysis of postmortem human tissue relies mostly on manual interaction, often subjected to low-throughput and prone to error, leading to low inter and intra-observer reproducibility. Human postmortem brain samples challenges neuroscientists because of the high level of autofluorescence caused by accumulation of lipofuscin pigment during aging, hindering systematic analyses. We propose a method for automating cell counting and classification in IF microscopy of human postmortem brains. Our algorithm speeds up the quantification task while improving reproducibility. Dictionary learning and sparse coding allow for constructing improved cell representations using IF images. These models are input for detection and segmentation methods. Classification occurs by means of color distances between cells and a learned set. Our method successfully detected and classified cells in 49 human brain images. We evaluated our results regarding true positive, false positive, false negative, precision, recall, false positive rate and F1 score metrics. We also measured user-experience and time saved compared to manual countings. We compared our results to four open-access IF-based cell-counting tools available in the literature. Our method showed improved accuracy for all data samples. The proposed method satisfactorily detects and classifies cells from human postmortem brain IF images, with potential to be generalized for applications in other counting tasks.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165027017300596; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.03.002; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85014796373&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28267565; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0165027017300596; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.03.002
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know