A system for automated counting of fetal and maternal red blood cells in clinical KB test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Kleihauer-Betke test (KBT) is a widely used method for measuring fetal-maternal hemorrhage (FMH) in maternal care. In hospitals, KBT is performed by a certified technologist to count a minimum of 2,000 fetal and maternal red blood cells (RBCs) on a blood smear. Manual counting is inherently inconsistent and subjective. This paper presents a system for automated counting and distinguishing fetal and maternal RBCs on clinical KB slides. A custom-adapted hardware platform is used for KB slide scanning and image capturing. Spatial-color pixel classification with spectral clustering is proposed to separate overlapping cells. Optimal clustering number and total cell number are obtained through maximizing cluster validity index. To accurately identify fetal RBCs from maternal RBCs, multiple features including cell size, shape, gradient and saturation difference are used in supervised learning to generate feature vectors, to tackle cell color, shape and contrast variations across clinical KB slides. The results show that the automated system is capable of completing the counting of over 60,000 cells (vs. 2,000 by technologists) within 5 minutes (vs. 15 minutes by technologists). The counting results are highly accurate and correlate strongly with those from benchmarking flow cytometry measurement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".