The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Design and validation of a tool for neurite tracing and analysis in fluorescence microscopy images
Open accessAbstract
Background: For the investigation of the molecular mechanisms involved in neurite outgrowth and differentiation, accurate and reproducible segmentation and quantification of neuronal processes are a prerequisite. To facilitate this task, we developed a semiautomatic neurite tracing technique. This article describes the design and validation of the technique. Methods: The technique was compared to fully manual delineation. Four observers repeatedly traced selected neurites in 20 fluorescence microscopy images of cells in culture, using both methods. Accuracy and reproducibility were determined by comparing the tracings to high‐resolution reference tracings, using two error measures. Labor intensiveness was measured in numbers of mouse clicks required. The significance of the results was determined by a Student t‐test and by analysis of variance. Results: Both methods slightly underestimated the true neurite length, but the differences were not unanimously significant. The average deviation from the true neurite centerline was a factor 2.6 smaller with the developed technique compared to fully manual tracing. Intraobserver variability in the respective measures was reduced by a factor 6.0 and 23.2. Interobserver variability was reduced by a factor 2.4 and 8.8, respectively, and labor intensiveness by a factor 3.3. Conclusions: Providing similar accuracy in measuring neurite length, significantly improved accuracy in neurite centerline extraction, and significantly improved reproducibility and reduced labor intensiveness, the developed technique may replace fully manual tracing methods. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
Cited by
Lian, H., Yang, L., Cole, A., Sun, L., Chiang, A. C.-A., Fowler, S. W., Shim, D. J., Rodriguez-Rivera, J., Taglialatela, G., Jankowsky, J. L., et al. (2015) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.11.018 · Cited by 697
Peng, H., Ruan, Z., Long, F., Simpson, J. H., & Myers, E. W. (2010) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.1612 · Cited by 707
ALS-implicated protein TDP-43 sustains levels of STMN2, a mediator of motor neuron growth and repair
Klim, J. R., Williams, L. A., Limone, F., Guerra San Juan, I., Davis-Dusenbery, B. N., Mordes, D. A., Burberry, A., Steinbaugh, M. J., Gamage, K. K., Kirchner, R., et al. (2019) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-018-0300-4 · Cited by 653
Human endogenous retrovirus-K contributes to motor neuron disease
Li, W., Lee, M.-H., Henderson, L., Tyagi, R., Bachani, M., Steiner, J., Campanac, E., Hoffman, D. A., von Geldern, G., Johnson, K., et al. (2015) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aac8201 · Cited by 482
Excitatory GABA Action Is Essential for Morphological Maturation of Cortical Neurons In Vivo
Cancedda, L., Fiumelli, H., Chen, K., & Poo, M.-M. (2007) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.5169-06.2007 · Cited by 392
Metadata
- Authors
- Meijering, E., Jacob, M., Sarria, J. ‐. F., Steiner, P., Hirling, H., & Unser, M.
- Venue
- Cytometry Part A
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-03-15
- Volume
- 58A
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 167-176
- ISSN
- 1552-4922 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-4930
- OpenAlex
- W2169931542
- Cited by
- 1,608
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.