Estimating the hole surface area of insecticide-treated nets using image analysis, manual hole counting and exact hole measurements.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Emmanuel Mbuba, Natalia Mañas-Chavernas, Sarah J Moore, Philipo David Ruzige, Dickson Kobe, Jason Moore, Rose Philipo, Noela Kisoka, Gianpaolo Pontiggia, Frank Chacky, Charles Dismasi Mwalimu, Philippe Claude Cattin, Julia Wolleb, Robin Sandkuehler, Amanda Ross
{"title":"Estimating the hole surface area of insecticide-treated nets using image analysis, manual hole counting and exact hole measurements.","authors":"Emmanuel Mbuba, Natalia Mañas-Chavernas, Sarah J Moore, Philipo David Ruzige, Dickson Kobe, Jason Moore, Rose Philipo, Noela Kisoka, Gianpaolo Pontiggia, Frank Chacky, Charles Dismasi Mwalimu, Philippe Claude Cattin, Julia Wolleb, Robin Sandkuehler, Amanda Ross","doi":"10.1186/s12936-025-05324-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The physical integrity of insecticidal-treated nets (ITNs) is important for creating a barrier against host-seeking mosquitoes and, therefore, influences people's perception of the net's effectiveness and their willingness to use it. Monitoring the physical integrity of ITNs over time provides information for replenishment schedules and purchasing decisions. Currently, the assessment of physical integrity of ITNs is conducted by manually counting holes and estimating their size to class the net as functional or not. This approach is laborious to routinely conduct during field surveys of ITNs. Automated image analysis may provide a rapid assessment of the physical integrity of ITNs but it is not known if the images can capture sufficient information. As a first step, this study aimed to assess the agreement between estimated hole surface areas derived from (1) manually segmented images, (2) manual hole counting compared to (3) ground truth obtained by calibrated close-up shots of individual holes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The physical integrity of 75 ITNs purposely selected from an ongoing study was assessed by manual hole counting, image analysis and ground truth. For the image analysis, a graphical user interface was developed and used for the segmentation of holes visible in photographs taken from each side of the net. The hole surface area was then computed from this data. The agreement between the estimates from image analysis and manual hole counting was compared to the ground truth using the Bland-Altman method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was substantial agreement between the manually segmented image analysis estimates and the ground truth hole surface areas. The overall bias was small, with a mean ratio of the hole surface area from image analysis to the ground truth of 0.70, and the 95% limits of agreement ranging from 0.35 to 1.38. Manual hole counting underestimated the hole surface area compared to the ground truth, particularly among nets with holes above 10 cm in diameter.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Images coupled with manual segmentation contain sufficient information to calculate hole surface area. This lays the groundwork for incorporating automatic hole detection, and then assessing whether this method will offer a fast and objective method for routine assessment of physical integrity of ITNs. While the WHO method underestimated the hole surface area, it remains useful in classifying nets as either serviceable or too torn because the cut-off is specific to this method.</p>","PeriodicalId":18317,"journal":{"name":"Malaria Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":"82"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11909875/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Malaria Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-025-05324-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The physical integrity of insecticidal-treated nets (ITNs) is important for creating a barrier against host-seeking mosquitoes and, therefore, influences people's perception of the net's effectiveness and their willingness to use it. Monitoring the physical integrity of ITNs over time provides information for replenishment schedules and purchasing decisions. Currently, the assessment of physical integrity of ITNs is conducted by manually counting holes and estimating their size to class the net as functional or not. This approach is laborious to routinely conduct during field surveys of ITNs. Automated image analysis may provide a rapid assessment of the physical integrity of ITNs but it is not known if the images can capture sufficient information. As a first step, this study aimed to assess the agreement between estimated hole surface areas derived from (1) manually segmented images, (2) manual hole counting compared to (3) ground truth obtained by calibrated close-up shots of individual holes.

Methods: The physical integrity of 75 ITNs purposely selected from an ongoing study was assessed by manual hole counting, image analysis and ground truth. For the image analysis, a graphical user interface was developed and used for the segmentation of holes visible in photographs taken from each side of the net. The hole surface area was then computed from this data. The agreement between the estimates from image analysis and manual hole counting was compared to the ground truth using the Bland-Altman method.

Results: There was substantial agreement between the manually segmented image analysis estimates and the ground truth hole surface areas. The overall bias was small, with a mean ratio of the hole surface area from image analysis to the ground truth of 0.70, and the 95% limits of agreement ranging from 0.35 to 1.38. Manual hole counting underestimated the hole surface area compared to the ground truth, particularly among nets with holes above 10 cm in diameter.

Conclusion: Images coupled with manual segmentation contain sufficient information to calculate hole surface area. This lays the groundwork for incorporating automatic hole detection, and then assessing whether this method will offer a fast and objective method for routine assessment of physical integrity of ITNs. While the WHO method underestimated the hole surface area, it remains useful in classifying nets as either serviceable or too torn because the cut-off is specific to this method.

利用图像分析、人工数孔和精确测量来估算驱虫蚊帐的孔表面积。
背景:经杀虫剂处理过的蚊帐(ITNs)的物理完整性对于形成屏障防止寻找宿主的蚊子非常重要,因此影响人们对蚊帐有效性的看法和他们使用蚊帐的意愿。长期监测itn的物理完整性可为补充计划和采购决策提供信息。目前,对网络物理完整性的评估是通过人工计算孔洞并估计孔洞大小来对网络进行功能分类。在ITNs实地调查期间,常规采用这种方法很费力。自动图像分析可以提供对itn物理完整性的快速评估,但不知道图像是否可以捕获足够的信息。作为第一步,本研究旨在评估(1)手动分割图像(2)手动孔计数得出的估计孔表面积与(3)通过校准单个孔的特写镜头获得的地面真实值之间的一致性。方法:从正在进行的研究中选择75个itn的物理完整性通过人工孔计数,图像分析和地面真实度进行评估。对于图像分析,开发了一个图形用户界面,用于从网的每一边拍摄的照片中可见的孔的分割。然后根据这些数据计算井眼表面积。使用Bland-Altman方法比较了图像分析和人工孔数估计之间的一致性。结果:人工分割的图像分析估计值与地面真实孔表面积之间有很大的一致性。总体偏差较小,图像分析的孔表面积与地面真实值的平均比值为0.70,95%的一致性范围为0.35 ~ 1.38。人工计算孔洞比地面实际情况低估了孔洞表面积,特别是孔径在10厘米以上的网。结论:结合人工分割的图像包含了足够的信息,可以计算孔洞表面积。这为引入自动井眼检测奠定了基础,然后评估该方法是否能为常规评估井眼物理完整性提供一种快速客观的方法。虽然世卫组织的方法低估了孔洞表面积,但它在将蚊帐分类为可用或太破时仍然有用,因为这种方法的截止值是特定的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Malaria Journal
Malaria Journal 医学-寄生虫学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
23.30%
发文量
334
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Malaria Journal is aimed at the scientific community interested in malaria in its broadest sense. It is the only journal that publishes exclusively articles on malaria and, as such, it aims to bring together knowledge from the different specialities involved in this very broad discipline, from the bench to the bedside and to the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信