Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40580140›Full record

ReviewNano letters2025

Phase Imaging Methods in the Scanning Transmission Electron Microscope.

Gabriel Sanchez-Santolino, Laura Clark, Satoko Toyama, Takehito Seki, Naoya Shibata

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nano letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Gabriel Sanchez-SantolinoGFMC, Departamento de Física de Materiales & Instituto Pluridisciplinar, Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), 28040 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8036-707X
Laura ClarkSchool of Physics Engineering and Technology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, U.K.
Satoko ToyamaInstitute of Engineering Innovation, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Yayoi 2-11-16, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8128-3094
Takehito SekiInstitute of Engineering Innovation, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Yayoi 2-11-16, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan.
Naoya ShibataInstitute of Engineering Innovation, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Yayoi 2-11-16, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-3548-5952

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) has become an essential tool for investigating materials, providing detailed characterization at nano and atomic scales. By combining subangstrom resolution Z-contrast imaging with analytical X-ray and electron spectroscopies, STEM allows the visualization of atomic arrangements, crystal defects, and interfaces, understanding sample properties and correlating these with the functionalities of materials and devices. Recent advancements in phase imaging techniques, including differential phase contrast (DPC) and electron ptychography, have further enhanced STEM capabilities. These methods allow direct imaging of electromagnetic fields, the study of beam-sensitive materials with high dose efficiency, or resolving the 3D structure of materials, proving invaluable for investigating intricate nanoscale phenomena. This review introduces phase imaging methods in the STEM and explores how the most recent innovations are driving progress in nanoscience, deepening material insights and shaping next-generation applications in electronics, energy storage, and catalysis.

Indexed as

4D-STEMdifferential phase contrastphase imagingptychographyscanning transmission electron microscopy

Identifiers

PMID40580140
PMCPMC12257644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.