ArticleAnalytical chemistry2023
Comparison of Tiling Artifact Removal Methods in Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry Images.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of a Hopfield neural network to extract essential spectral patterns from ToF-SIMS spectra of peptides.Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry · 2026Article
- Spatial omics strategies for investigating human carotid atherosclerotic disease.Clinical and translational medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (ToF-SIMS) imaging is used across many fields for the atomic and molecular characterization of surfaces, with both high sensitivity and high spatial resolution. When large analysis areas are required, standard ToF-SIMS instruments allow for the acquisition of adjoining tiles, which are acquired by rastering the primary ion beam. For such large area scans, tiling artifacts are a ubiquitous challenge, manifesting as intensity gradients across each tile and/or sudden changes in intensity between tiles. Such artifacts are thought to be related to a combination of sample charging, local detector sensitivity issues, and misalignment of the primary ion gun, among other instrumental factors. In this work, we investigated six different computational tiling artifact removal methods: tensor decomposition, multiplicative linear correction, linear discriminant analysis, seamless stitching, simple averaging, and simple interpolating. To ensure robustness in the study, we applied these methods to three hyperspectral ToF-SIMS data sets and one OrbiTrapSIMS data set. Our study includes a carefully designed statistical analysis and a quantitative survey that subjectively assessed the quality of the various methods employed. Our results demonstrate that while certain methods are useful and preferred more often, no one particular approach can be considered universally acceptable and that the effectiveness of the artifact removal method is strongly dependent on the particulars of the data set analyzed. As examples, the multiplicative linear correction and seamless stitching methods tended to score more highly on the subjective survey; however, for some data sets, this led to the introduction of new artifacts. In contrast, simple averaging and interpolation methods scored subjectively poorly on the biological data set, but more highly on the microarray data sets. We discuss and explore these findings in depth and present general recommendations given our findings to conclude the work.
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.