ArticleJournal of cell science2024
Harnessing artificial intelligence to reduce phototoxicity in live imaging.
Article in Journal of cell science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatial architecture of immunometabolism: Mitochondrial‑organelle interfaces in immune signaling (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Fast label-free live imaging with FlowVision reveals key principles of cancer cell arrest on endothelial monolayers.The EMBO journal · 2026Article
- A flexible framework for automated STED super-resolution microscopy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- PhotoFiTT: a quantitative framework for assessing phototoxicity in live-cell microscopy experiments.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Advancing Platelet Research Through Live-Cell Imaging: Challenges, Techniques, and Insights.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Individual-based modeling unravels spatial and social interactions in bacterial communities.The ISME journal · 2025Review
- AI-based hardware and software tools in microscopy to boost research in immunology and virology.Frontiers in immunology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fluorescence microscopy is essential for studying living cells, tissues and organisms. However, the fluorescent light that switches on fluorescent molecules also harms the samples, jeopardizing the validity of results - particularly in techniques such as super-resolution microscopy, which demands extended illumination. Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled software capable of denoising, image restoration, temporal interpolation or cross-modal style transfer has great potential to rescue live imaging data and limit photodamage. Yet we believe the focus should be on maintaining light-induced damage at levels that preserve natural cell behaviour. In this Opinion piece, we argue that a shift in role for AIs is needed - AI should be used to extract rich insights from gentle imaging rather than recover compromised data from harsh illumination. Although AI can enhance imaging, our ultimate goal should be to uncover biological truths, not just retrieve data. It is essential to prioritize minimizing photodamage over merely pushing technical limits. Our approach is aimed towards gentle acquisition and observation of undisturbed living systems, aligning with the essence of live-cell fluorescence microscopy.
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.