↓ Skip to main content

Generalizing cell segmentation and quantification

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Generalizing cell segmentation and quantification
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1604-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhenzhou Wang, Haixing Li

Abstract

In recent years, the microscopy technology for imaging cells has developed greatly and rapidly. The accompanying requirements for automatic segmentation and quantification of the imaged cells are becoming more and more. After studied widely in both scientific research and industrial applications for many decades, cell segmentation has achieved great progress, especially in segmenting some specific types of cells, e.g. muscle cells. However, it lacks a framework to address the cell segmentation problems generally. On the contrary, different segmentation methods were proposed to address the different types of cells, which makes the research work divergent. In addition, most of the popular segmentation and quantification tools usually require a great part of manual work. To make the cell segmentation work more convergent, we propose a framework that is able to segment different kinds of cells automatically and robustly in this paper. This framework evolves the previously proposed method in segmenting the muscle cells and generalizes it to be suitable for segmenting and quantifying a variety of cell images by adding more union cases. Compared to the previous methods, the segmentation and quantification accuracy of the proposed framework is also improved by three novel procedures: (1) a simplified calibration method is proposed and added for the threshold selection process; (2) a noise blob filter is proposed to get rid of the noise blobs. (3) a boundary smoothing filter is proposed to reduce the false seeds produced by the iterative erosion. As it turned out, the quantification accuracy of the proposed framework increases from 93.4 to 96.8% compared to the previous method. In addition, the accuracy of the proposed framework is also better in quantifying the muscle cells than two available state-of-the-art methods. The proposed framework is able to automatically segment and quantify more types of cells than state-of-the-art methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 27%
Student > Master 9 19%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 10 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 19%
Computer Science 8 17%
Physics and Astronomy 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 10 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,539,663
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,342
of 7,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,372
of 309,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#100
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,306 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,217 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.