Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
3
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1982-1-28
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
A comparison is made between the efficiency of an opto-manual digitizer-tablet (MOP-AM 03) and simple point counting in the analysis of drawings of basal cells in the normal and pathologically altered chonchal epithelium. The analysis included estimation of the areas of cellular, nuclear and nucleolar sectional profiles as well as the cell basal width, i.e. the length of cell profile attachment to the basement membrane. The morphometric results obtained with the two methods are virtually identical. The efficiency of point counting is somewhat higher than that of the digitizer, but the prices of the two sets of equipment differ by one or two orders of magnitude. In general, the unquestionable measuring precision of the digitizer is unlikely to be of much impact in most biological studies due to the inevitable biological variation between individuals under study and the large variation which is always added at the level of single features by random sectioning.
|
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:issn |
0340-6075
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
37
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
317-25
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2006-11-15
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1981
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Comparison of semiautomatic digitizer-tablet and simple point counting performance in morphometry.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
Comparative Study
|