A guide to accurate reporting in digital image processing – Can anyone reproduce your quantitative analysis?

40Citations
Citations of this article
148Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Considerable attention has been recently paid to improving replicability and reproducibility in life science research. This has resulted in commendable efforts to standardize a variety of reagents, assays, cell lines and other resources. However, given that microscopy is a dominant tool for biologists, comparatively little discussion has been offered regarding how the proper reporting and documentation of microscopy relevant details should be handled. Image processing is a critical step of almost any microscopy-based experiment; however, improper, or incomplete reporting of its use in the literature is pervasive. The chosen details of an image processing workflow can dramatically determine the outcome of subsequent analyses, and indeed, the overall conclusions of a study. This Review aims to illustrate how proper reporting of image processing methodology improves scientific reproducibility and strengthens the biological conclusions derived from the results.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aaron, J., & Chew, T. L. (2021, March 1). A guide to accurate reporting in digital image processing – Can anyone reproduce your quantitative analysis? Journal of Cell Science. Company of Biologists Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.254151

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free