Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35154862›Full record

ArticleBiomedical optics express2022

Deep convolutional neural network-based scatterer density and resolution estimators in optical coherence tomography.

Thitiya Seesan, Ibrahim Abd El-Sadek, Pradipta Mukherjee, Lida Zhu, Kensuke Oikawa, Arata Miyazawa, Larina Tzu-Wei Shen, Satoshi Matsusaka, Prathan Buranasiri, Shuichi Makita and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical optics express, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Thitiya SeesanComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Ibrahim Abd El-SadekComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0674-169X
Pradipta MukherjeeComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Lida ZhuComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Kensuke OikawaComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Arata MiyazawaComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Larina Tzu-Wei ShenClinical Research and Regional Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Satoshi MatsusakaClinical Research and Regional Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Prathan BuranasiriDepartment of Physics, School of Science, King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Ladkrabang, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7071-3194
Shuichi MakitaComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6614-3640
Yoshiaki YasunoComputational Optics Group, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1645-7948

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present deep convolutional neural network (DCNN)-based estimators of the tissue scatterer density (SD), lateral and axial resolutions, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and effective number of scatterers (ENS, the number of scatterers within a resolution volume). The estimators analyze the speckle pattern of an optical coherence tomography (OCT) image in estimating these parameters. The DCNN is trained by a large number (1,280,000) of image patches that are fully numerically generated in OCT imaging simulation. Numerical and experimental validations were performed. The numerical validation shows good estimation accuracy as the root mean square errors were 0.23%, 3.65%, 3.58%, 3.79%, and 6.15% for SD, lateral and axial resolutions, SNR, and ENS, respectively. The experimental validation using scattering phantoms (Intralipid emulsion) shows reasonable estimations. Namely, the estimated SDs were proportional to the Intralipid concentrations, and the average estimation errors of lateral and axial resolutions were 1.36% and 0.68%, respectively. The scatterer density estimator was also applied to an

Identifiers

PMID35154862
PMCPMC8803045

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.