These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33583965)
1. A Registration and Deep Learning Approach to Automated Landmark Detection for Geometric Morphometrics. Devine J; Aponte JD; Katz DC; Liu W; Lo Vercio LD; Forkert ND; Marcucio R; Percival CJ; Hallgrímsson B Evol Biol; 2020 Sep; 47(3):246-259. PubMed ID: 33583965 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The effect of automated landmark identification on morphometric analyses. Percival CJ; Devine J; Darwin BC; Liu W; van Eede M; Henkelman RM; Hallgrimsson B J Anat; 2019 Jun; 234(6):917-935. PubMed ID: 30901082 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Measurement error in μCT-based three-dimensional geometric morphometrics introduced by surface generation and landmark data acquisition. Engelkes K; Helfsgott J; Hammel JU; Büsse S; Kleinteich T; Beerlink A; Gorb SN; Haas A J Anat; 2019 Aug; 235(2):357-378. PubMed ID: 31062345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. High-Density Morphometric Analysis of Shape and Integration: The Good, the Bad, and the Not-Really-a-Problem. Goswami A; Watanabe A; Felice RN; Bardua C; Fabre AC; Polly PD Integr Comp Biol; 2019 Sep; 59(3):669-683. PubMed ID: 31243431 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Automated Landmark Annotation for Morphometric Analysis of Distal Femur and Proximal Tibia. Grammens J; Van Haver A; Lumban-Gaol I; Danckaers F; Verdonk P; Sijbers J J Imaging; 2024 Apr; 10(4):. PubMed ID: 38667988 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Performance of single and multi-atlas based automated landmarking methods compared to expert annotations in volumetric microCT datasets of mouse mandibles. Young R; Maga AM Front Zool; 2015; 12():33. PubMed ID: 26628903 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A novel 3-D image-based morphological method for phenotypic analysis. Kristensen E; Parsons TE; Hallgrímsson B; Boyd SK IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2008 Dec; 55(12):2826-31. PubMed ID: 19126464 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Landmark precision and reliability and accuracy of linear distances estimated by using 3D computed micro-tomography and the open-source TINA Manual Landmarking Tool software. Simon MN; Marroig G Front Zool; 2015; 12():12. PubMed ID: 26120349 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. ALPACA: A fast and accurate computer vision approach for automated landmarking of three-dimensional biological structures. Porto A; Rolfe S; Maga AM Methods Ecol Evol; 2021 Nov; 12(11):2129-2144. PubMed ID: 35874971 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Rapid automated landmarking for morphometric analysis of three-dimensional facial scans. Li M; Cole JB; Manyama M; Larson JR; Liberton DK; Riccardi SL; Ferrara TM; Santorico SA; Bannister JJ; Forkert ND; Spritz RA; Mio W; Hallgrimsson B J Anat; 2017 Apr; 230(4):607-618. PubMed ID: 28078731 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Are geometric morphometric analyses replicable? Evaluating landmark measurement error and its impact on extant and fossil Fox NS; Veneracion JJ; Blois JL Ecol Evol; 2020 Apr; 10(7):3260-3275. PubMed ID: 32273985 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Automatic landmark generation for deformable image registration evaluation for 4D CT images of lung. Vickress J; Battista J; Barnett R; Morgan J; Yartsev S Phys Med Biol; 2016 Oct; 61(20):7236-7245. PubMed ID: 27694706 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Automatic landmark detection and mapping for 2D/3D registration with BoneNet. Nguyen V; Alves Pereira LF; Liang Z; Mielke F; Van Houtte J; Sijbers J; De Beenhouwer J Front Vet Sci; 2022; 9():923449. PubMed ID: 36061115 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The problem of assessing landmark error in geometric morphometrics: theory, methods, and modifications. von Cramon-Taubadel N; Frazier BC; Lahr MM Am J Phys Anthropol; 2007 Sep; 134(1):24-35. PubMed ID: 17503448 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Procrustes-based geometric morphometrics on MRI images: An example of inter-operator bias in 3D landmarks and its impact on big datasets. Daboul A; Ivanovska T; Bülow R; Biffar R; Cardini A PLoS One; 2018; 13(5):e0197675. PubMed ID: 29787586 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A method to detect landmark pairs accurately between intra-patient volumetric medical images. Yang D; Zhang M; Chang X; Fu Y; Liu S; Li HH; Mutic S; Duan Y Med Phys; 2017 Nov; 44(11):5859-5872. PubMed ID: 28834555 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Landmark constellation models for medical image content identification and localization. Hansis E; Lorenz C Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg; 2016 Jul; 11(7):1285-95. PubMed ID: 26662202 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Anatomical landmarks for registration of experimental image data to volumetric rodent brain atlasing templates. Sergejeva M; Papp EA; Bakker R; Gaudnek MA; Okamura-Oho Y; Boline J; Bjaalie JG; Hess A J Neurosci Methods; 2015 Jan; 240():161-9. PubMed ID: 25445058 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Automated morphological phenotyping using learned shape descriptors and functional maps: A novel approach to geometric morphometrics. Thomas OO; Shen H; Raaum RL; Harcourt-Smith WEH; Polk JD; Hasegawa-Johnson M PLoS Comput Biol; 2023 Jan; 19(1):e1009061. PubMed ID: 36656910 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]