ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2025
Impact of signal-to-noise ratio and contrast definition on the sensitivity assessment and benchmarking of fluorescence molecular imaging systems.
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-time fidelity assessment of fluorescence molecular imaging without reference images.Journal of biomedical optics · 2026Article
- Reflect: reporting guidelines for preclinical, translational and clinical fluorescence molecular imaging studies.Npj imaging · 2025Article
- Article
- Elucidating the effect of tumor and background region-of-interest selection on the performance metrics used to assess fluorescence imaging.Journal of biomedical optics · 2025Article
- Introduction to the Special Issue on Molecular Guided Surgery.Journal of biomedical optics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Standardization of fluorescence molecular imaging (FMI) is critical for ensuring quality control in guiding surgical procedures. To accurately evaluate system performance, two metrics, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast, are widely employed. However, there is currently no consensus on how these metrics can be computed. Aim: We aim to examine the impact of SNR and contrast definitions on the performance assessment of FMI systems. Approach: We quantified the SNR and contrast of six near-infrared FMI systems by imaging a multi-parametric phantom. Based on approaches commonly used in the literature, we quantified seven SNRs and four contrast values considering different background regions and/or formulas. Then, we calculated benchmarking (BM) scores and respective rank values for each system. Results: We show that the performance assessment of an FMI system changes depending on the background locations and the applied quantification method. For a single system, the different metrics can vary up to Conclusions: The definition of precise guidelines for FMI performance assessment is imperative to ensure successful clinical translation of the technology. Such guidelines can also enable quality control for the already clinically approved indocyanine green-based fluorescence image-guided surgery.
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.