Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32103649›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2020

Investigating ultrasound-light interaction in scattering media.

Yujia Huang, Michelle Cua, Joshua Brake, Yan Liu, Changhuei Yang

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06468566 (Identification of Benign and Malignant Breast Nodules Using Opalogram Ultrasonography), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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.

NCT06468566 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Identification of Benign and Malignant Breast Nodules Using Opalogram Ultrasonography: A Multicenter Study

TypeobservationalSponsorXin-Wu CuiRan2024 to 2026Enrolled2,000ConditionsBreast Cancer FemaleArmsUltrasound light scattering imaging equipment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yujia HuangCalifornia Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Pasadena, California, United States.
Michelle CuaCalifornia Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Pasadena, California, United States.
Joshua BrakeCalifornia Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Pasadena, California, United States.
Yan LiuCalifornia Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Pasadena, California, United States.
Changhuei YangCalifornia Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Pasadena, California, United States.
California Institute of Technology · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

significanceUltrasound-assisted optical imaging techniques, such as ultrasound-modulated optical tomography, allow for imaging deep inside scattering media. In these modalities, a fraction of the photons passing through the ultrasound beam is modulated. The efficiency by which the photons are converted is typically referred to as the ultrasound modulation's "tagging efficiency." Interestingly, this efficiency has been defined in varied and discrepant fashion throughout the scientific literature.

aimThe aim of this study is the ultrasound tagging efficiency in a manner consistent with its definition and experimentally verify the contributive (or noncontributive) relationship between the mechanisms involved in the ultrasound optical modulation process. APPROACH: We adopt a general description of the tagging efficiency as the fraction of photons traversing an ultrasound beam that is frequency shifted (inclusion of all frequency-shifted components). We then systematically studied the impact of ultrasound pressure and frequency on the tagging efficiency through a balanced detection measurement system that measured the power of each order of the ultrasound tagged light, as well as the power of the unmodulated light component.

resultsThrough our experiments, we showed that the tagging efficiency can reach 70% in a scattering phantom with a scattering anisotropy of 0.9 and a scattering coefficient of 4  mm  -  1 for a 1-MHz ultrasound with a relatively low (and biomedically acceptable) peak pressure of 0.47 MPa. Furthermore, we experimentally confirmed that the two ultrasound-induced light modulation mechanisms, particle displacement and refractive index change, act in opposition to each other.

conclusionTagging efficiency was quantified via simulation and experiments. These findings reveal avenues of investigation that may help improve ultrasound-assisted optical imaging techniques.

Indexed as

Scattering, RadiationAnisotropyComputer SimulationOptical ImagingOptics and PhotonicsPhantoms, ImagingUltrasonographyacousto-opticsscatteringtomography

Identifiers

PMID32103649
PMCPMC7043283
OpenAlexW3008404315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.