ReviewBiomicrofluidics2023
Machine learning implementation strategy in imaging and impedance flow cytometry.
Review in Biomicrofluidics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of cryopreserved bovine sperm assessment: harnessing imaging flow cytometry for multi-parametric analysis.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Pooled it
- Fusion of microscopic and diffraction images with VGG net for budding yeast recognition in imaging flow cytometry.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Machine learning classification of cellular states based on the impedance features derived from microfluidic single-cell impedance flow cytometry.Biomicrofluidics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Imaging and impedance flow cytometry is a label-free technique that has shown promise as a potential replacement for standard flow cytometry. This is due to its ability to provide rich information and archive high-throughput analysis. Recently, significant efforts have been made to leverage machine learning for processing the abundant data generated by those techniques, enabling rapid and accurate analysis. Harnessing the power of machine learning, imaging and impedance flow cytometry has demonstrated its capability to address various complex phenotyping scenarios. Herein, we present a comprehensive overview of the detailed strategies for implementing machine learning in imaging and impedance flow cytometry. We initiate the discussion by outlining the commonly employed setup to acquire the data (i.e., image or signal) from the cell. Subsequently, we delve into the necessary processes for extracting features from the acquired image or signal data. Finally, we discuss how these features can be utilized for cell phenotyping through the application of machine learning algorithms. Furthermore, we discuss the existing challenges and provide insights for future perspectives of intelligent imaging and impedance flow cytometry.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.