ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997)2011
Optimization of magnetic field sweep and field modulation amplitude for continuous-wave EPR oximetry.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- EPR spectroscopy of complex biological iron-sulfur systems.Journal of biological inorganic chemistry : JBIC : a publication of the Society of Biological Inorganic Chemistry · 2018Review
- Dual-scan acquisition for accelerated continuous-wave EPR oximetry.Journal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997) · 2012Article
- Spectral modeling for accelerated pH spectroscopy using EPR.Journal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997) · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For continuous-wave electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy, what settings of magnetic field sweep width and field modulation amplitude yield the best accuracy in estimated linewidth? Statistical bounds on estimation error presented in this work provide practical guidance: set the sweep width and modulation amplitude to 8 and 4 times the half-width half-maximum linewidth, Γ, respectively. For unknown linewidths in the range [Γ(min),Γ(max)] the worst-case estimation error is minimized by using settings designed for Γ(max). The analysis assumes a Lorentzian lineshape and a constant modulation amplitude across the extent of the irradiated paramagnetic probe. The analytical guidelines are validated using L-band spectroscopy with a particulate LiNc-BuO probe.
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.