Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29976951›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2018

High-throughput imaging flow cytometry by optofluidic time-stretch microscopy.

Cheng Lei, Hirofumi Kobayashi, Yi Wu, Ming Li, Akihiro Isozaki, Atsushi Yasumoto, Hideharu Mikami, Takuro Ito, Nao Nitta, Takeaki Sugimura and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 161 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. LFC-Lab on a chip · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Lab on a Particle Technologies.Analytical chemistry · 2024
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Visualisation of Host-Pathogen Communication.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

15 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Cheng LeiDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. leicheng@chem.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8439-4235
Hirofumi KobayashiDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yi WuDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Ming LiDepartment of Electrical Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Akihiro IsozakiDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Atsushi YasumotoDepartment of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Hideharu MikamiDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Takuro ItoJapan Science and Technology Agency, Kawaguchi, Japan.
Nao NittaJapan Science and Technology Agency, Kawaguchi, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9093-9016
Takeaki SugimuraJapan Science and Technology Agency, Kawaguchi, Japan.
Makoto YamadaCentre for Advanced Intelligence Project, RIKEN, Tokyo, Japan.
Yutaka YatomiDepartment of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Dino Di CarloDepartment of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Yasuyuki OzekiDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Systems, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Keisuke GodaDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. goda@chem.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp.
The University of Tokyo · JPJapan Science and Technology Agency · JPCalifornia NanoSystems Institute · USRIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project · JPTokyo University of Information Sciences · JPTokyo University of Science · JPUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to rapidly assay morphological and intracellular molecular variations within large heterogeneous populations of cells is essential for understanding and exploiting cellular heterogeneity. Optofluidic time-stretch microscopy is a powerful method for meeting this goal, as it enables high-throughput imaging flow cytometry for large-scale single-cell analysis of various cell types ranging from human blood to algae, enabling a unique class of biological, medical, pharmaceutical, and green energy applications. Here, we describe how to perform high-throughput imaging flow cytometry by optofluidic time-stretch microscopy. Specifically, this protocol provides step-by-step instructions on how to build an optical time-stretch microscope and a cell-focusing microfluidic device for optofluidic time-stretch microscopy, use it for high-throughput single-cell image acquisition with sub-micrometer resolution at >10,000 cells per s, conduct image construction and enhancement, perform image analysis for large-scale single-cell analysis, and use computational tools such as compressive sensing and machine learning for handling the cellular 'big data'. Assuming all components are readily available, a research team of three to four members with an intermediate level of experience with optics, electronics, microfluidics, digital signal processing, and sample preparation can complete this protocol in a time frame of 1 month.

Indexed as

Flow CytometryHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicrofluidicsMicroscopyOptical Imaging

Identifiers

PMID29976951
OpenAlexW2835530235

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.