Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26203384›Full record

ArticleBiomedical optics express2015

Flux or speed? Examining speckle contrast imaging of vascular flows.

S M Shams Kazmi, Ehssan Faraji, Mitchell A Davis, Yu-Yen Huang, Xiaojing J Zhang, Andrew K Dunn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical optics express, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Minimally Invasive Bowel Cancer Detection through Vibrating Microrobot-Induced Elastography.Advanced intelligent systems (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Wide-field intensity fluctuation imaging.Biomedical optics express · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Wide-field Intensity Fluctuation Imaging.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

S M Shams KazmiThe University of Texas at Austin, Department of Biomedical Engineering, 107 W. Dean Keeton C0800, Austin, Texas 78712, USA.
Ehssan FarajiThe University of Texas at Austin, Department of Biomedical Engineering, 107 W. Dean Keeton C0800, Austin, Texas 78712, USA.
Mitchell A DavisThe University of Texas at Austin, Department of Biomedical Engineering, 107 W. Dean Keeton C0800, Austin, Texas 78712, USA.
Yu-Yen HuangThe University of Texas at Austin, Department of Biomedical Engineering, 107 W. Dean Keeton C0800, Austin, Texas 78712, USA ; Currently with Dartmouth College, Thayer School of Engineering, 14 Engineering Drive, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, USA.
Xiaojing J ZhangThe University of Texas at Austin, Department of Biomedical Engineering, 107 W. Dean Keeton C0800, Austin, Texas 78712, USA ; Currently with Dartmouth College, Thayer School of Engineering, 14 Engineering Drive, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, USA.
Andrew K DunnThe University of Texas at Austin, Department of Biomedical Engineering, 107 W. Dean Keeton C0800, Austin, Texas 78712, USA.
The University of Texas at Austin · US

Funding

Optical Imaging of Baseline Blood Flow and Oxygenation During StrokeR01EB011556 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI DUNN, ANDREW K · 2010 to 2018
$3.1M
Microscale Oxygenation Mapping During StrokeR01NS082518 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI DUNN, ANDREW K · 2013 to 2017
$1.7M
Neurovascular Mechanisms of Time-Dependencies in Stroke RehabilitationR01NS078791 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI DUNN, ANDREW K, JONES, THERESA A · 2012 to 2016
$1.7M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB011556NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS078791NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS082518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Speckle contrast imaging enables rapid mapping of relative blood flow distributions using camera detection of back-scattered laser light. However, speckle derived flow measures deviate from direct measurements of erythrocyte speeds by 47 ± 15% (n = 13 mice) in vessels of various calibers. Alternatively, deviations with estimates of volumetric flux are on average 91 ± 43%. We highlight and attempt to alleviate this discrepancy by accounting for the effects of multiple dynamic scattering with speckle imaging of microfluidic channels of varying sizes and then with red blood cell (RBC) tracking correlated speckle imaging of vascular flows in the cerebral cortex. By revisiting the governing dynamic light scattering models, we test the ability to predict the degree of multiple dynamic scattering across vessels in order to correct for the observed discrepancies between relative RBC speeds and multi-exposure speckle imaging estimates of inverse correlation times. The analysis reveals that traditional speckle contrast imagery of vascular flows is neither a measure of volumetric flux nor particle speed, but rather the product of speed and vessel diameter. The corrected speckle estimates of the relative RBC speeds have an average 10 ± 3% deviation in vivo with those obtained from RBC tracking.

Indexed as

(110.6150) Speckle imaging(170.0170) Medical optics and biotechnology

Identifiers

PMID26203384
PMCPMC4505712
OpenAlexW1016770665

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.