ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2023
Using pressure-driven flow systems to evaluate laser speckle contrast imaging.
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 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.
- Physics-informed neural network for mapping vascular and tissue dynamics using laser speckle contrast imaging.Neurophotonics · 2026Article
- Mapping fast tissue dynamics with long camera exposures via intensity modulation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Real-time wavelet threshold denoising for laser speckle blood flow imaging.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multi-exposure speckle imaging through an optical fiber bundle.Journal of biomedical optics · 2025Article
- Wide-field intensity fluctuation imaging.Biomedical optics express · 2024Article
- All fiber-based illumination system for multi-exposure speckle imaging.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.
Funding
Abstract
Significance: Microfluidic flow phantom studies are commonly used for characterizing the performance of laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI) instruments. The selection of the flow control system is critical for the reliable generation of flow during testing. The majority of recent LSCI studies using microfluidics used syringe pumps for flow control. Aim: We quantified the uncertainty in flow generation for a syringe pump and a pressure-regulated flow system. We then assessed the performance of both LSCI and multi-exposure speckle imaging (MESI) using the pressure-regulated flow system across a range of flow speeds. Approach: The syringe pump and pressure-regulated flow systems were evaluated during stepped flow profile experiments in a microfluidic device using an inline flow sensor. The uncertainty associated with each flow system was calculated and used to determine the reliability for instrument testing. The pressure-regulated flow system was then used to characterize the relative performance of LSCI and MESI during stepped flow profile experiments while using the inline flow sensor as reference. Results: The pressure-regulated flow system produced much more stable and reproducible flow outputs compared to the syringe pump. The expanded uncertainty for the syringe pump was 8 to Conclusions: Pressure-regulated flow systems should be used instead of syringe pumps when assessing the performance of flow measurement techniques with microfluidic studies. MESI offers more accurate relative flow measurements than traditional LSCI across a wide range of flow speeds.
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.