ArticleBiomedical optics express2022
Reconstruction of optical coefficients in turbid media using time-resolved reflectance and calibration-free instrument response functions.
Article in Biomedical optics express, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measurement-Aware Computational Modeling for Optical Spectrometry in Scattering-Dominated Systems.ACS omega · 2026Article
- How the heterogeneity of the severely injured brain affects hybrid diffuse optical signals: case examples and guidelines.Neurophotonics · 2024Article
- Two-layered blood-lipid phantom and method to determine absorption and oxygenation employing changes in moments of DTOFs.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Efficient computation of the steady-state and time-domain solutions of the photon diffusion equation in layered turbid media.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measurements of time-resolved reflectance from a homogenous turbid medium can be employed to retrieve the absolute values of its optical transport coefficients. However, the uncertainty in the temporal shift of the experimentally determined instrument response function (IRF) with respect to the real system response can lead to errors in optical property reconstructions. Instrument noise and measurement of the IRF in a reflectance geometry can exacerbate these errors. Here, we examine three reconstruction approaches that avoid requiring direct measurements of photon launch times. They work by (a) fitting relative shapes of the reflectance profile with a pre-determined constraint on the scattering coefficient, (b) calibrating launch-time differences via a reference sample, and (c) freely fitting for the launch-time difference within the inverse problem. Analysis methods that can place a tight bound on the scattering coefficient can produce errors within 5-15% for both absorption and scattering at source-detector separations of 10 and 15 mm. Including the time-shift in the fitting procedure also recovered optical coefficients to under 20% but showed large crosstalk between extracted scattering and absorption coefficients. We find that the uncertainty in the temporal shift greatly impacts the reconstructed reduced scattering coefficient compared to absorption.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.