Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36266466›Full record

ReviewNature methods2022

Practical considerations for quantitative light sheet fluorescence microscopy.

Chad M Hobson, Min Guo, Harshad D Vishwasrao, Yicong Wu, Hari Shroff, Teng-Leong Chew

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

6 authors.

Chad M HobsonAdvanced Imaging Center, Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, VA, USA.
Min GuoState Key Laboratory of Modern Optical Instrumentation, College of Optical Science and Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2093-8771
Harshad D VishwasraoAdvanced Imaging and Microscopy Resource, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Yicong WuLaboratory of High Resolution Optical Imaging, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8819-7527
Hari ShroffLaboratory of High Resolution Optical Imaging, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Teng-Leong ChewAdvanced Imaging Center, Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, VA, USA. chewt@janelia.hhmi.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3139-7560

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluorescence microscopy has evolved from a purely observational tool to a platform for quantitative, hypothesis-driven research. As such, the demand for faster and less phototoxic imaging modalities has spurred a rapid growth in light sheet fluorescence microscopy (LSFM). By restricting the excitation to a thin plane, LSFM reduces the overall light dose to a specimen while simultaneously improving image contrast. However, the defining characteristics of light sheet microscopes subsequently warrant unique considerations in their use for quantitative experiments. In this Perspective, we outline many of the pitfalls in LSFM that can compromise analysis and confound interpretation. Moreover, we offer guidance in addressing these caveats when possible. In doing so, we hope to provide a useful resource for life scientists seeking to adopt LSFM to quantitatively address complex biological hypotheses.

Indexed as

Microscopy, Fluorescence

Identifiers

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.