Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33415850›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2021

FLIM data analysis based on Laguerre polynomial decomposition and machine-learning.

Shuxia Guo, Anja Silge, Hyeonsoo Bae, Tatiana Tolstik, Tobias Meyer, Georg Matziolis, Michael Schmitt, Jürgen Popp, Thomas Bocklitz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shuxia GuoUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Anja SilgeUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Hyeonsoo BaeUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Tatiana TolstikUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Tobias MeyerUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Georg MatziolisJena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Michael SchmittUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Jürgen PoppUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Thomas BocklitzUniversity of Jena, Institute of Physical Chemistry, Abbe Center of Photonics, Jena, Germany.
Jena University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

significanceThe potential of fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy (FLIM) is recently being recognized, especially in biological studies. However, FLIM does not directly measure the lifetimes, rather it records the fluorescence decay traces. The lifetimes and/or abundances have to be estimated from these traces during the phase of data processing. To precisely estimate these parameters is challenging and requires a well-designed computer program. Conventionally employed methods, which are based on curve fitting, are computationally expensive and limited in performance especially for highly noisy FLIM data. The graphical analysis, while free of fit, requires calibration samples for a quantitative analysis.

aimWe propose to extract the lifetimes and abundances directly from the decay traces through machine learning (ML). APPROACH: The ML-based approach was verified with simulated testing data in which the lifetimes and abundances were known exactly. Thereafter, we compared its performance with the commercial software SPCImage based on datasets measured from biological samples on a time-correlated single photon counting system. We reconstructed the decay traces using the lifetime and abundance values estimated by ML and SPCImage methods and utilized the root-mean-squared-error (RMSE) as marker.

resultsThe RMSE, which represents the difference between the reconstructed and measured decay traces, was observed to be lower for ML than for SPCImage. In addition, we could demonstrate with a three-component analysis the high potential and flexibility of the ML method to deal with more than two lifetime components.

conclusionsThe ML-based approach shows great performance in FLIM data analysis.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsData AnalysisFluorescence Resonance Energy TransferMachine LearningMicroscopy, Fluorescencechemometricsfit-freefluorescence lifetime imaging microscopylife time extractionmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID33415850
PMCPMC7790506
OpenAlexW3119888191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.