ArticleScientific reports2022
3D scattering microphantom sample to assess quantitative accuracy in tomographic phase microscopy techniques.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inverse scattering in biological samples via beam propagation.Science advances · 2026Article
- Article
- Quantitative phase imaging verification in large field-of-view lensless holographic microscopy via two-photon 3D printing.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Recent Advances and Current Trends in Transmission Tomographic Diffraction Microscopy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Durable 3D murine ex vivo retina glaucoma models for optical coherence tomography.Biomedical optics express · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In this paper we present a structurally-complex biomimetic scattering structure, fabricated with two-photon polymerization, and utilize this object in order to benchmark a computational imaging system. The phantom allows to tailor the scattering by modifying its degrees of freedom i.e. refractive index contrast and scattering layer dimensions and incorporates a 3D imaging quality test, representing a single cell within tissue. While the sample may be used with multiple 3D microscopy techniques, we demonstrate the impact of scattering on three tomographic phase microscopy (TPM) reconstruction methods. One of these methods assumes the sample to be weak-scattering, while the other two take multiple scattering into account. The study is performed at two wavelengths (visible and near-infrared), which serve as a scaling factor for the scattering phenomenon. We find that changing the wavelength from visible into near-infrared impacts the applicability of TPM reconstruction methods. As a result of reduced scattering in near-infrared region, the multiple-scattering-oriented techniques perform in fact worse than a method aimed for weak-scattering samples. This implies a necessity of selecting proper approach depending on sample's scattering characteristics even in case of subtle changes in the object-light interaction.
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.