↓ Skip to main content

Ranked retrieval of segmented nuclei for objective assessment of cancer gene repositioning

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 X user
patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ranked retrieval of segmented nuclei for objective assessment of cancer gene repositioning
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-13-232
Pubmed ID
Authors

William J Cukierski, Kaustav Nandy, Prabhakar Gudla, Karen J Meaburn, Tom Misteli, David J Foran, Stephen J Lockett

Abstract

Correct segmentation is critical to many applications within automated microscopy image analysis. Despite the availability of advanced segmentation algorithms, variations in cell morphology, sample preparation, and acquisition settings often lead to segmentation errors. This manuscript introduces a ranked-retrieval approach using logistic regression to automate selection of accurately segmented nuclei from a set of candidate segmentations. The methodology is validated on an application of spatial gene repositioning in breast cancer cell nuclei. Gene repositioning is analyzed in patient tissue sections by labeling sequences with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), followed by measurement of the relative position of each gene from the nuclear center to the nuclear periphery. This technique requires hundreds of well-segmented nuclei per sample to achieve statistical significance. Although the tissue samples in this study contain a surplus of available nuclei, automatic identification of the well-segmented subset remains a challenging task.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 23%
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Professor 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 26%
Engineering 6 19%
Computer Science 5 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 5 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,587,783
of 24,226,848 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#759
of 7,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,992
of 171,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#12
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,226,848 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 171,273 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.