MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102535885 · doi:10.1186/1475-2875-10-364

Automated and unsupervised detection of malarial parasites in microscopic images

2011· article· en· W2102535885 on OpenAlexafffund
Yashasvi Purwar, Sirish L. Shah, Gwen Clarke, Areej Almugairi, Atis Muehlenbachs

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaria Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Imaging for Blood Diseases
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Washington
KeywordsParasitologyTropical medicineMalarial parasitesArtificial intelligenceEntomologyMalariaComputer scienceMedicineBiologyPathologyZoologyPlasmodium falciparum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Malaria is a serious infectious disease. According to the World Health Organization, it is responsible for nearly one million deaths each year. There are various techniques to diagnose malaria of which manual microscopy is considered to be the gold standard. However due to the number of steps required in manual assessment, this diagnostic method is time consuming (leading to late diagnosis) and prone to human error (leading to erroneous diagnosis), even in experienced hands. The focus of this study is to develop a robust, unsupervised and sensitive malaria screening technique with low material cost and one that has an advantage over other techniques in that it minimizes human reliance and is, therefore, more consistent in applying diagnostic criteria. METHOD: A method based on digital image processing of Giemsa-stained thin smear image is developed to facilitate the diagnostic process. The diagnosis procedure is divided into two parts; enumeration and identification. The image-based method presented here is designed to automate the process of enumeration and identification; with the main advantage being its ability to carry out the diagnosis in an unsupervised manner and yet have high sensitivity and thus reducing cases of false negatives. RESULTS: The image based method is tested over more than 500 images from two independent laboratories. The aim is to distinguish between positive and negative cases of malaria using thin smear blood slide images. Due to the unsupervised nature of method it requires minimal human intervention thus speeding up the whole process of diagnosis. Overall sensitivity to capture cases of malaria is 100% and specificity ranges from 50-88% for all species of malaria parasites. CONCLUSION: Image based screening method will speed up the whole process of diagnosis and is more advantageous over laboratory procedures that are prone to errors and where pathological expertise is minimal. Further this method provides a consistent and robust way of generating the parasite clearance curves.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaria JournalSame topicDigital Imaging for Blood DiseasesFrench-language works237,207