ArticleApplied optics2014
Analysis of cross-sectional image filters for evaluating nonaveraged optical microangiography images.
Article in Applied optics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Segmentation and quantification of blood vessels for OCT-based micro-angiograms using hybrid shape/intensity compounding.Microvascular research · 2015Article
- Motion artifact and background noise suppression on optical microangiography frames using a naïve Bayes mask.Applied optics · 2014Article
- Optical coherence tomography microangiography for monitoring the response of vascular perfusion to external pressure on human skin tissue.Journal of biomedical optics · 2014Article
- Assessment of microcirculation dynamics during cutaneous wound healing phases in vivo using optical microangiography.Journal of biomedical optics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Optical microangiography (OMAG) is a method that enables the noninvasive extraction of blood vessels within biological tissues. OMAG B-frames are prone to noise; therefore, techniques such as B-frame averaging have been applied to reduce these effects. A drawback of this method is that the total acquisition time and amount of data collected are increased; hence, the data are susceptible to motion artifacts and decorrelation. In this paper we propose using an image filter on a nonaveraged OMAG B-frame to reduce its noise. Consequently, B-frames comparable to the averaged OMAG B-frame are obtained, while reducing the total acquisition and processing time. The method is tested with two different systems, a high-resolution spectral domain and a relatively low-resolution swept-source optical coherence tomography system. It is demonstrated that the weighted average filter produces the lowest B-frame error; however, all filters produce comparable results when quantifying the en face projection view image.
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.