Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16263923›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2005

Chemical imaging of tissue in vivo with video-rate coherent anti-Stokes Raman scattering microscopy.

Conor L Evans, Eric O Potma, Mehron Puoris'haag, Daniel Côté, Charles P Lin, X Sunney Xie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 260 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
260citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

260 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

200 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Conor L EvansDepartment of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
Eric O Potma
Mehron Puoris'haag
Daniel Côté
Charles P Lin
X Sunney Xie

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Imaging living organisms with molecular selectivity typically requires the introduction of specific labels. Many applications in biology and medicine, however, would significantly benefit from a noninvasive imaging technique that circumvents such exogenous probes. In vivo microscopy based on vibrational spectroscopic contrast offers a unique approach for visualizing tissue architecture with molecular specificity. We have developed a sensitive technique for vibrational imaging of tissues by combining coherent anti-Stokes Raman scattering (CARS) with video-rate microscopy. Backscattering of the intense forward-propagating CARS radiation in tissue gives rise to a strong epi-CARS signal that makes in vivo imaging possible. This substantially large signal allows for real-time monitoring of dynamic processes, such as the diffusion of chemical compounds, in tissues. By tuning into the CH(2) stretching vibrational band, we demonstrate CARS imaging and spectroscopy of lipid-rich tissue structures in the skin of a live mouse, including sebaceous glands, corneocytes, and adipocytes, with unprecedented contrast at subcellular resolution.

Indexed as

AnimalsDiffusionFemaleMiceMice, HairlessMice, Inbred BALB CMicroscopyMineral OilScattering, RadiationSkinSpectrum Analysis, RamanMineral Oil

Identifiers

PMID16263923
PMCPMC1283840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.