Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37713387›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

The image-based ultrasonic cell shaking test.

Miranda Ballard, Aleksander Marek, Fabrice Pierron

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The 2026 guided acoustic waves roadmap.Journal of physics D: Applied physics · 2026
    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

3 authors.

Miranda BallardFaculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0000-4497-004X
Aleksander MarekFaculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Fabrice PierronFaculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mechanical signals play a vital role in cell biology and is a vast area of research. Thus, there is motivation to understand cell deformation and mechanobiological responses. However, the ability to controllably deform cells in the ultrasonic regime and test their response is a noted challenge throughout the literature. Quantifying and eliciting an appropriate stimulus has proven to be difficult, resulting in methods that are either too aggressive or oversimplified. Furthermore, the ability to gain a real-time insight into cell deformation and link this with the biological response is yet to be achieved. One application of this understanding is in ultrasonic surgical cutting, which is a promising alternative to traditional methods, but with little understanding of its effect on cells. Here we present the image based ultrasonic cell shaking test, a novel method that enables controllable loading of cells and quantification of their response to ultrasonic vibrations. Practically, this involves seeding cells on a substrate that resonates at ultrasonic frequencies and transfers the deformation to the cells. This is then incorporated into microscopic imaging techniques to obtain high-speed images of ultrasonic cell deformation that can be analysed using digital image correlation techniques. Cells can then be extracted after excitation to undergo analysis to understand the biological response to the deformation. This method could aid in understanding the effects of ultrasonic stimulation on cells and how activated mechanobiological pathways result in physical and biochemical responses.

Indexed as

UltrasonicsUltrasonic WavesAggressionBiophysicsMotivation

Identifiers

PMID37713387
PMCPMC10503762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.