ArticleNeurophotonics2025
Cerebral blood flow monitoring using a deep learning implementation of the two-layer diffuse correlation spectroscopy analytical model with a 512 × 512 SPAD array.
Article in Neurophotonics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Monte Carlo simulations of time-resolved blood flow index: times-of-flight beyond ∼1 ns are necessary for brain-dominated measurements.Neurophotonics · 2026Article
- Assessing liquid light guides in diffuse correlation spectroscopy systems.Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
- Comparison of diffuse correlation spectroscopy analytical models for cerebral blood flow measurements.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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Multilayer (two- and three-layer) diffuse correlation spectroscopy (DCS) models improve cerebral blood flow index (CBFi) measurement sensitivity and mitigate interference from extracerebral tissues. However, their reliance on multiple predefined parameters (e.g., layer thickness and optical properties) and high computational load limit their feasibility for real-time bedside monitoring. Aim: We aim to develop a fast, accurate DCS data processing method based on the two-layer DCS analytical model, enabling real-time cerebral perfusion monitoring with enhanced brain sensitivity. Approach: We employed deep learning (DL) to accelerate DCS data processing. Unlike previous DCS networks trained on single-layer models, our network learns from the two-layer DCS analytical model, capturing extracerebral versus cerebral dynamics. Realistic noise was estimated from subject-specific baseline measurements using a Results: The proposed method bypasses traditional curve-fitting and achieves real-time monitoring of CBF changes at 35 mm separation for the first time with a DL approach. Validation on MC simulations shows superior accuracy in relative CBFi estimation (4.1% error versus 12.7% for single-exponential fitting) and significantly enhanced CBFi sensitivity (86.5% versus 57.7%). Although the two-layer analytical fitting offers optimal performance, it depends on strict assumptions and preconditions, and its computational complexity makes it time-consuming and unsuitable for real-time monitoring applications.In addition, our method minimizes the influence of superficial blood flow and is 750-fold faster than single-exponential fitting in a realistic scenario. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that integrating DL with the two-layer DCS analytical model enables accurate, real-time cerebral perfusion monitoring without sacrificing depth sensitivity. The proposed method enhances CBFi sensitivity and recovery accuracy, supporting future deployment in bedside neuro-monitoring applications.
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.