"peritrabecular" meaning in All languages combined

{
  "etymology_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "en",
        "2": "peri",
        "3": "trabecular"
      },
      "expansion": "peri- + trabecular",
      "name": "prefix"
    }
  ],
  "etymology_text": "From peri- + trabecular.",
  "head_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "-"
      },
      "expansion": "peritrabecular (not comparable)",
      "name": "en-adj"
    }
  ],
  "lang": "English",
  "lang_code": "en",
  "pos": "adj",
  "senses": [
    {
      "categories": [
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "English entries with incorrect language header",
          "parents": [
            "Entries with incorrect language header",
            "Entry maintenance"
          ],
          "source": "w"
        },
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "English terms prefixed with peri-",
          "parents": [],
          "source": "w"
        },
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "Pages with 1 entry",
          "parents": [],
          "source": "w"
        },
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "Pages with entries",
          "parents": [],
          "source": "w"
        }
      ],
      "examples": [
        {
          "ref": "2015 September 2, Cleo-Aron Weis et al., “On the representation of cells in bone marrow pathology by a scalar field: propagation through serial sections, co-localization and spatial interaction analysis”, in Diagnostic Pathology, volume 10, →DOI:",
          "text": "Histogram intersection is calculated for direct and indirect interaction (RBF direct and RBF indirect ). a Nodular, peritrabecular infiltration (intersection 0.81 ± 0.05 for direct and 0.88 ± 0.03 for indirect interaction). b Nodular, non-peritrabecular infiltration (intersection 0.51 ± 0.05 for direct and 0.77 ± 0.02 for indirect interaction). c Diffuse bone marrow infiltration (intersection 0.66 ± 0.013 for direct and 0.82 ± 0.05 for indirect interaction) The herein presented approach (compare Additional file 1 : Figure S1) enables to run morphological analysis of bone marrow infiltrates, which is a demanding task due to – amongst other – highly complex immunophenotypes (e.g.",
          "type": "quote"
        }
      ],
      "glosses": [
        "Surrounding a trabecula"
      ],
      "id": "en-peritrabecular-en-adj-sWoF~U0A",
      "links": [
        [
          "trabecula",
          "trabecula"
        ]
      ],
      "tags": [
        "not-comparable"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "word": "peritrabecular"
}

{
  "etymology_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "en",
        "2": "peri",
        "3": "trabecular"
      },
      "expansion": "peri- + trabecular",
      "name": "prefix"
    }
  ],
  "etymology_text": "From peri- + trabecular.",
  "head_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "-"
      },
      "expansion": "peritrabecular (not comparable)",
      "name": "en-adj"
    }
  ],
  "lang": "English",
  "lang_code": "en",
  "pos": "adj",
  "senses": [
    {
      "categories": [
        "English adjectives",
        "English entries with incorrect language header",
        "English lemmas",
        "English terms prefixed with peri-",
        "English terms with quotations",
        "English uncomparable adjectives",
        "Pages with 1 entry",
        "Pages with entries"
      ],
      "examples": [
        {
          "ref": "2015 September 2, Cleo-Aron Weis et al., “On the representation of cells in bone marrow pathology by a scalar field: propagation through serial sections, co-localization and spatial interaction analysis”, in Diagnostic Pathology, volume 10, →DOI:",
          "text": "Histogram intersection is calculated for direct and indirect interaction (RBF direct and RBF indirect ). a Nodular, peritrabecular infiltration (intersection 0.81 ± 0.05 for direct and 0.88 ± 0.03 for indirect interaction). b Nodular, non-peritrabecular infiltration (intersection 0.51 ± 0.05 for direct and 0.77 ± 0.02 for indirect interaction). c Diffuse bone marrow infiltration (intersection 0.66 ± 0.013 for direct and 0.82 ± 0.05 for indirect interaction) The herein presented approach (compare Additional file 1 : Figure S1) enables to run morphological analysis of bone marrow infiltrates, which is a demanding task due to – amongst other – highly complex immunophenotypes (e.g.",
          "type": "quote"
        }
      ],
      "glosses": [
        "Surrounding a trabecula"
      ],
      "links": [
        [
          "trabecula",
          "trabecula"
        ]
      ],
      "tags": [
        "not-comparable"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "word": "peritrabecular"
}