Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35650960›Full record

ArticleACS macro letters2018

Optical Tweezers Microrheology: From the Basics to Advanced Techniques and Applications.

Rae M Robertson-Anderson

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS macro letters, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 110 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Macrophages Mediate Mesoscale Brain Mechanical Homeostasis.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rae M Robertson-AndersonUniversity of San Diego, Physics and Biophysics Department, 5998 Alcala Park, San Diego, California 92110, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4475-4667
University of San Diego · US

Funding

Biomimetic cytoskeleton and advanced microscopy to reveal intracellular DNA dynamics and distributionsR15GM123420 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO · PI MCGORTY, RYAN, ROBERTSON-ANDERSON, RAE MARIE · 2017 to 2022
$939k
NIGMS NIH HHS R15 GM123420
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past few decades, microrheology has emerged as a widely used technique to measure the mechanical properties of soft viscoelastic materials. Optical tweezers offer a powerful platform for performing microrheology measurements and can measure rheological properties at the level of single molecules out to near macroscopic scales. Unlike passive microrheology methods, which use diffusing microspheres to extract rheological properties, optical tweezers can probe the nonlinear viscoelastic response, and measure the space- and time-dependent rheological properties of heterogeneous, nonequilibrium materials. In this Viewpoint, I describe the basic principles underlying optical tweezers microrheology, the instrumentation and material requirements, and key applications to widely studied soft biological materials. I also describe several sophisticated approaches that include coupling optical tweezers to fluorescence microscopy and microfluidics. The described techniques can robustly characterize noncontinuum mechanics, nonlinear mechanical responses, strain-field heterogeneities, stress propagation, force relaxation dynamics, and time-dependent mechanics of active materials.

Identifiers

PMID35650960
PMCPMC9163451
OpenAlexW2886654635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.