ArticleScientific reports2023
Methodology for estimation of undeformed thickness of arterial tissues.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Compensating thickness effects in micro X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy using integrated optical microscopy for thickness determination of soft matter block copolymer membranes.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Approach to Standardized Material Characterization of the Human Lumbopelvic System: Testing and Evaluation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Optimizing Arterial Tissue Thickness Measurement Protocols: Digital Vernier Caliper Versus Digital Thickness Gauge.Methods and protocols · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Soft tissue sample thickness measurement is one of the major sources of differences between mechanical responses published by different groups. New method for the estimation of unloaded sample thickness of soft tissues is proposed in this study. Ten 30 × 30 mm and ten 20 × 20 mm samples of porcine anterior thoracic aortas were loaded by gradually increased radial force. Their deformed thickness was then recorded in order to generate a pressure-thickness response. Next, the limit pressure to which the response can be considered linear was estimated. Line was fitted to the linear part of the curve and extrapolated towards zero pressure to estimate unloaded thickness (7 kPa fit). For comparison, data near zero pressure were fitted separately and extrapolated towards zero (Near Zero fit). The limit pressure for the linearity of the response was around 7 kPa. The Unloaded thickness for 30 × 30 mm samples was 2.68 ± 0.31 mm and 2.68 ± 0.3 mm for Near Zero fit and 7 kPa fit, respectively. The Unloaded thickness for 20 × 20 mm samples was 2.60 ± 0.35 mm and 2.59 ± 0.35 mm for Near Zero fit and 7 kPa fit, respectively. The median of thickness difference between smaller and larger samples was not found statistically different. Proposed method can estimate unloaded undeformed sample thickness quickly and reliably.
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.