Assessment of Stem Cell Viability through Visual Analysis Coupled with Teachable Machine
Kim C., Son J., Chaudhary D., Park YK., Cho JH., Ryu D.
Laboratory Study, published in Int J Stem Cells (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Laboratory Study
- Journal
- Int J Stem Cells (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 40484699
- PMCID
- PMC12394080
- DOI
- 10.15283/ijsc24105
- Citations
- 1
Abstract (original English)
Cell viability is an indispensable aspect of cells in the field of drug discovery, cell biology, and biomedical research to assess the physiological conditions of cells such as healthiness, functionality, survivability, etc. Recently, there have been several methods for determining the cell viability through either cell staining with trypan blue and acridine orange, propidium iodide, calcein-AM, etc., or colorimetric assays such as cell counting kit-8 assay. However, these methods have some limitations like time-consuming, expensive, unstable, individual variability, etc. Even present artificial intelligence software such as QuPath, ImageJ, etc., can only determine the cell viability after cell staining. Therefore, we attempted to determine whether cells are alive or not depending on the visual characteristics of an individual cell using Teachable Machine, a web-based artificial intelligence tool provided by Google. Labeling work to assign correct answers to learning data consumes a lot of time and human costs because it is usually done manually. To solve this problem, labeling was automated by recognizing and extracting only individual cells from the image using the contour function to increase time efficiency. In addition, many datasets were created to evaluate and compare the performances of models. Based on the results, the model that showed the best performance showed an a
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.