ArticleMicroscopy research and technique2023
Acquisition and evaluation procedure to improve the accuracy of SAED.
Article in Microscopy research and technique, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Green Synthesis of Curcuminoids-Enriched Trimetallic Nanoparticles Stabilised by Chitosan/Collagen Nanocomposites against Foodborne Pathogens.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2026Article
- S-atom dislocation-induced room-temperature ferroelectricity in two-dimensional α-MnS semiconductor.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Cr-Al Spinel phase formation in alumina dispersed 316 L stainless steel processed by spark plasma sintering.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- High-Throughput Micro-Combinatorial TEM Phase Mapping of the DC Magnetron Sputtered YNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Improved Method for Electron Powder Diffraction-Based Rietveld Analysis of Nanomaterials.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Acquisition and evaluation procedure to improve the accuracy of SAED.Microscopy research and technique · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The achievement of this work is that fine tuning of experimental and evaluation parameters can improve the absolute accuracy and reproducibility of selected area electron diffraction (SAED) to 0.1% without using internal standard. Due to the proposed procedure it was possible to reach a reproducibility better than 0.03% for camera length between sessions by careful control of specimen height and illumination conditions by monitoring lens currents. We applied a calibration specimen composed of nanocrystalline grains free of texture and providing narrow diffraction rings. Refinements of the centre of the diffraction pattern and corrections for elliptic ring distortions allowed for determining the ring diameters with an accuracy of 0.1%. We analyze the effect of different error sources and reason the achieved absolute accuracy of the measurement. Application of the proposed evaluation procedure is inevitable in case of multicomponent nanocomposites or textured materials and/or having close diffraction rings where application of automated procedures is limited. The achieved accuracy of 0.1% without internal standard is approaching that of routine laboratory XRD, and reduction of instrumental broadening due to the elaborated evaluation procedure allows for separation of close reflections, provides more reliable ring width and thus improved input parameters for further nanostructure analysis as demonstrated on dental enamel bioapatite.
Indexed as
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.