Artificial Intelligence-enabled Histological Analysis in Preclinical Respiratory Disease Models: A Scoping Review
Kuhar, E.; Park, J.; Jahandideh, F.; Komeili, M.; Sadeknury, A.; Kang, N.; Karunamurthy, P.; Reza Zarei, M.; Ebrahimi, A.; Gill, S. E.; Liaw, P. C.; Fergusson, D. A.; Stewart, D. J.; Mer, A.; Lalu, M. M.
Show abstract
Histological analysis is a cornerstone of preclinical respiratory disease research, enabling assessment of pathology, therapeutic effects, and mechanisms. However, conventional approaches rely on manual scoring, which is subjective, time-consuming, and difficult to scale due to low throughput and inter-observer variability. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly deep learning, offers potential to automate histology workflows, but its use and evaluation in preclinical respiratory models have not been synthesized. We conducted a scoping review following Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, searching MEDLINE and Embase (inception-January 2025) for preclinical studies using AI to analyze histology in respiratory disease models. Screening, full-text review, and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Of 6271 studies screened, 29 met inclusion criteria. Most used murine models (76%) and investigated lung cancer (28%), pulmonary fibrosis (24%), or tuberculosis (17%). Hematoxylin and eosin was the most common stain (48%), with others targeting collagen or immune markers. AI tasks included image classification (n=20), segmentation (n=10), and object detection (n=4), predominantly using convolutional neural networks (69%). Preprocessing methods (e.g., stain normalization) were common, but annotation and training practices were inconsistently reported. Performance was generally high (accuracy [≥]90%; 7 studies) though validation metrics varied, and external validation was absent. Most studies used "black box" models, with minimal application of explainability techniques. Reproducibility measures, such as sharing datasets or code were rarely reported. AI tools are poised to transform histological analysis in preclinical respiratory research. By addressing gaps in validation, transparency, and standardization, the field can harness these technologies to deliver robust, efficient, and scalable workflows. Registration: Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/NM94E
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Classification performance bias between training and test sets in a limited mammography dataset 93%
- Accuracy of deep learning based computed tomography diagnostic system of COVID-19: a consecutive sampling external validation cohort study 92%
- An automated morphometric approach to evaluate distal lung patterning in mouse models of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Annotation-free multi-organ anomaly detection in abdominal CT using free-text radiology reports: A multi-center retrospective study 92%
- Fusing Data from CT Deep Learning, CT Radiomics and Peripheral Blood Immune profiles to Diagnose Lung Cancer in Symptomatic Patients 91%
- Characterizing Long COVID: Deep Phenotype of a Complex Condition 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Automated processing of thermal imaging to detect COVID-19 93%
- An ML prediction model based on clinical parameters and automated CT scan features for COVID-19 patients 93%
- High-Dimensional Multinomial Multiclass Severity Scoring of COVID-19 Pneumonia Using CT Radiomics Features and Machine Learning Algorithms 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Phase 2 Study Design and Analysis Approach for BBT-877: An Autotaxin Inhibitor Targeting Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis 90%
- Monocyte and neutrophil levels are potentially linked to progression to IPF for patients with indeterminate UIP CT pattern 90%
- Remote-management of COPD: Evaluating Implementation of Digital Innovation to Enable Routine Care (RECEIVER) – Protocol for a feasibility and service adoption observational cohort study 89%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.