ArticleBiomedical optics express2024
Validation of an automated method for studying retinal capillary blood flow.
Article in Biomedical optics express, 2024. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two major approaches for tracking cellular motion across a range of biological tissues are the manual labelling of cells, and automated analysis of spatiotemporal information represented in a kymograph. Here we compare these two approaches for the measurement of retinal capillary flow, a particularly noisy application due to the low intrinsic contrast of single red blood cells (erythrocytes). Image data were obtained using a flood-illuminated adaptive optics ophthalmoscope at 750 nm, allowing the acquisition of flow information over several cardiac cycles which provided key information in evaluating tracking accuracy. Our results show that in addition to being much faster, the automated method is more accurate in the face of rapid flow and reduced image contrast. This study represents the first validation of commonly used kymograph approaches to capillary flow analysis.
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.