Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40376420›Full record

ReviewBiophysical reviews2025

Making sense of blobs, whorls, and shades: methods for label-free, inverse imaging in bright-field optical microscopy.

Braulio Gutiérrez-Medina

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biophysical reviews, 2025. 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. Article
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

1 author.

Braulio Gutiérrez-MedinaDivision of Advanced Materials, Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, Camino a la Presa San José 2055, 78216 San Luis Potosí, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite its long history and widespread use, conventional bright-field optical microscopy has received recent attention as an excellent option to perform accurate, label-free, imaging of biological objects. As with any imaging system, bright-field produces an ill-defined representation of the specimen, in this case characterized by intertwined phase and amplitude in image formation, invisibility of phase objects at exact focus, and both positive and negative contrast present in images. These drawbacks have prevented the application of bright-field to the accurate imaging of unlabeled specimens. To address these challenges, a variety of methods using hardware, software or both have been developed, with the goal of providing solutions to the inverse imaging problem set in bright-field. We revise the main operating principles and characteristics of bright-field microscopy, followed by a discussion of the solutions (and potential limitations) to reconstruction in two dimensions (2D). We focus on methods based on conventional optics, including defocusing microscopy, transport of intensity, ptychography and deconvolution. Advances to achieving three-dimensional (3D) bright-field imaging are presented, including methods that exploit multi-view reconstruction, physical modeling, deep learning and conventional digital image processing. Among these techniques, optical sectioning in bright-field microscopy (OSBM) constitutes a direct approach that captures

Indexed as

Bright-field microscopyDeconvolutionDigital image processingLabel-free imagingOptical sectioningTransmitted light microscopy

Identifiers

PMID40376420
PMCPMC12075049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.