Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Leucocyte classification for leukaemia detection using image processing techniques

Open access
Putzu, Lorenzo, Caocci, Giovanni, Di Ruberto, Cecilia·2014·Artificial Intelligence in Medicine

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The counting and classification of blood cells allow for the evaluation and diagnosis of a vast number of diseases. The analysis of white blood cells (WBCs) allows for the detection of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL), a blood cancer that can be fatal if left untreated. Currently, the morphological analysis of blood cells is performed manually by skilled operators. However, this method has numerous drawbacks, such as slow analysis, non-standard accuracy, and dependences on the operator's skill. Few examples of automated systems that can analyse and classify blood cells have been reported in the literature, and most of these systems are only partially developed. This paper presents a complete and fully automated method for WBC identification and classification using microscopic images. METHODS In contrast to other approaches that identify the nuclei first, which are more prominent than other components, the proposed approach isolates the whole leucocyte and then separates the nucleus and cytoplasm. This approach is necessary to analyse each cell component in detail. From each cell component, different features, such as shape, colour and texture, are extracted using a new approach for background pixel removal. This feature set was used to train different classification models in order to determine which one is most suitable for the detection of leukaemia. RESULTS Using our method, 245 of 267 total leucocytes were properly identified (92% accuracy) from 33 images taken with the same camera and under the same lighting conditions. Performing this evaluation using different classification models allowed us to establish that the support vector machine with a Gaussian radial basis kernel is the most suitable model for the identification of ALL, with an accuracy of 93% and a sensitivity of 98%. Furthermore, we evaluated the goodness of our new feature set, which displayed better performance with each evaluated classification model. CONCLUSIONS The proposed method permits the analysis of blood cells automatically via image processing techniques, and it represents a medical tool to avoid the numerous drawbacks associated with manual observation. This process could also be used for counting, as it provides excellent performance and allows for early diagnostic suspicion, which can then be confirmed by a haematologist through specialised techniques.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.artmed.2014.09.002

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 295

Metadata

Authors
Putzu, L., Caocci, G., & Di Ruberto, C.
Venue
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-11
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
179-191
ISSN
0933-3657 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035020726
Cited by
295
References
19
FWCI
11.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Leucocyte classification for leukaemia detection using image processing techniques. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.artmed.2014.09.002
The paper
Putzu, L., Caocci, G., & Di Ruberto, C. (2014). Leucocyte classification for leukaemia detection using image processing techniques. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2014.09.002

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.