ArticleArXiv2023
Dual-ratio approach for detection of point fluorophores in biological tissue.
Article in ArXiv, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
significanceDiffuse in-vivo Flow Cytometry (DiFC) is an emerging fluorescence sensing method to non-invasively detect labeled circulating cells in-vivo. However, due to Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) constraints largely attributed to background tissue autofluorescence, DiFC's measurement depth is limited. multiplies Aim: The Dual-Ratio (DR) / dual-slope is a new optical measurement method that aims to suppress noise and enhance SNR to deep tissue regions. We aim to investigate the combination of DR and Near-InfraRed (NIR) DiFC to improve circulating cells' maximum detectable depth and SNR. APPROACH: Phantom experiments were used to estimate the key parameters in a diffuse fluorescence excitation and emission model. This model and parameters were implemented in Monte-Carlo to simulate DR DiFC while varying noise and autofluorescence parameters to identify the advantages and limitations of the proposed technique.
resultsTwo key factors must be true to give DR DiFC an advantage over traditional DiFC; first, the fraction of noise that DR methods cannot cancel cannot be above the order of 10% for acceptable SNR. Second, DR DiFC has an advantage, in terms of SNR, if the distribution of tissue autofluorescence contributors is surface-weighted.
conclusionsDR cancelable noise may be designed for (e.g. through the use of source multiplexing), and indications point to the autofluorescence contributors' distribution being truly surface-weighted in-vivo. Successful and worthwhile implementation of DR DiFC depends on these considerations, but results point to DR DiFC having possible advantages over traditional DiFC.
Identifiers
37292468PMC10246068What 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.