ReviewSeminars in cell & developmental biology2009
Fluorescence microscopy below the diffraction limit.
Review in Seminars in cell & developmental biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Discussion on the comparison of Raman spectroscopy and cardiovascular disease-related imaging techniques and the future applications of Raman technology: a systematic review.Lasers in medical science · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating cell viability assessment techniques: a comparative study of flow cytometry and fluorescence microscopy in response to bioactive glass exposure.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- Strategies to overcome the main challenges of the use of exosomes as drug carrier for cancer therapy.Cancer cell international · 2022Review
- A Comparative Study to Visualize PtdIns(4,5) P2 and PtdIns(3,4,5) P3 in MDA-MB-231 Breast Cancer Cell Line.Reports of biochemistry & molecular biology · 2022Article
- Challenges and opportunities in exosome research-Perspectives from biology, engineering, and cancer therapy.APL bioengineering · 2019Review
- Aberration correction for improving the image quality in STED microscopy using the genetic algorithm.Nanophotonics (Berlin, Germany) · 2018Article
- Alternative reagents to antibodies in imaging applications.Biophysical reviews · 2017Review
- Two-photon-like microscopy with orders-of-magnitude lower illumination intensity via two-step fluorescence.Nature communications · 2015Article
- Review
- Quantifying spatial organization in point-localization superresolution images using pair correlation analysis.Nature protocols · 2013Article
- Optical highlighter molecules in neurobiology.Current opinion in neurobiology · 2012Review
- The power of correlative microscopy: multi-modal, multi-scale, multi-dimensional.Current opinion in structural biology · 2011Article
- Highlights of the optical highlighter fluorescent proteins.Journal of microscopy · 2011Review
- Imaging cellular architecture with X-rays.Current opinion in structural biology · 2010Review
- Signaling endosomes: seeing is believing.Current opinion in cell biology · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Fluorescence imaging with conventional microscopy has experienced numerous advances in almost every limiting factor from sensitivity to speed. But improved resolution beyond the fundamental limitation of light diffraction has been elusive until recent years. Now, techniques are available that surpass this barrier and improve resolution up to 10 times over that of conventional microscopy. This chapter provides an overview of these new "super-resolution" imaging methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.