Pete Bankhead claims he wrote this software. He is not an author of this paper.
A small number of people know the real background story to @QuPath, but most don't. I didn't plan to ever tell it… https://t.co/xKGLeMm5Mh
The short version is that I single-handedly wrote the software as a postdoc but was blocked from releasing it open-… https://t.co/XMdL3k1pu6
This worked - but meant I was out of academia, and my old group were free to take the credit. Which they did. It… https://t.co/4sHW8KwIjD
This was annoying but tolerable, until today I saw a new publication about QuPath's 'global impact' that changed my… https://t.co/AA4kRrhd49
I know the authors. They did not write a single line of code. They did not answer a single user question on the for… https://t.co/l9pJln1dFG
It seems they've cleverly used the passive voice and their affiliation to create the impression they were instrumen… https://t.co/Mc5I6FGkpt
The truth is QuPath is open-source because I worked on it constantly over years, learned a new level of stubbornnes… https://t.co/hhM2XYRxwh
In the end, it's just software. Technology moves on quickly. Looking back, I'm not sure it was worth the personal c… https://t.co/ALNE3KLT0h
If it does, it'll only be because of the things people do with it. Pathologists, biologists, and others with skills… https://t.co/EClYRXDngU
Now I'm older & a PI, I think more about why I stay in academia. It's mostly the many good people I've met & freedo… https://t.co/sH7oq0z6aK
There is a false statement in the abstract, repeated with a typo corrected in the introduction. The article states, "QuPath… is arguably the most [wildly/widely] used image analysis software program in the world."
No evidence is provided for this statement, and it can be readily falsified. For example, Figure 3 of the paper shows ~250 citations of QuPath in 2020, whereas there are more than 34,000 citations of ImageJ in that time period, listed by Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q="imagej"&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C22&as_ylo=2020&as_yhi=2020
Supporting evidence for code contribution for the QuPath project is logged in Github: https://github.com/qupath/qupath/graphs/contributors
This paper has 51 citations, which should have gone to the original QuPath paper. Please cite the correct paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17204-5
Also, a new Twitter post by Pete Bankhead https://twitter.com/petebankhead/status/1720127089687314691
Attach files by dragging & dropping, selecting them, or pasting from the clipboard. Uploading your files… We don’t support that file type. with a PNG, GIF, or JPG. Yowza, that’s a big file. with a file smaller than 1MB. This file is empty. with a file that’s not empty. Something went really wrong, and we can’t process that file.
Comment must be at least 15 characters.