ArticleThe journal of physical chemistry. B2025
Spontaneous or Stimulated? Investigating Raman's Detection Limits in Aqueous Environments.
Article in The journal of physical chemistry. B, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Longitudinal live-cell chemical imaging using coherent Raman scattering microscopy.The Analyst · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Raman spectroscopy is a powerful method for analyzing chemical compositions across diverse samples. Spontaneous Raman scattering (spRS) provides complete Raman spectra but typically yields low signal levels, requiring long signal integration times. In contrast, stimulated Raman scattering (SRS) produces much stronger signals, allowing for rapid spectral acquisition, and has been widely used to accelerate chemical imaging. While theoretical comparisons under ideal conditions suggest that performance depends on photon flux and integration time, little experimental work has been conducted to systematically compare the limit of detection (LOD) of spRS and SRS spectroscopy. Here, we comprehensively compare the LOD of frequency-domain spRS and SRS for water-soluble analytes in aqueous solutions, a common environment for biological specimens. We introduce a LOD estimation methodology by taking only three measurements to derive the dilution maximum. This approach greatly simplifies the determination of the LOD compared to the conventional method of using serial dilution, thus enabling the convenient and rapid evaluation of various factors that impact the LOD in linear spectroscopy. Using this method, we assessed factors influencing the LOD of SRS spectroscopy and determined optimal conditions. At a short spectral acquisition time, SRS exhibits shot-noise-limited performance, whereas at a longer acquisition time, photothermal effects, such as stimulated Raman photothermal absorption, and low-frequency 1/f noise can cause deviations from ideal LOD scenarios. Under optimized experimental conditions, spectral-domain SRS using slow frequency sweeping confidently detects ∼700 μM dimethyl sulfoxide in water and 1 g/L glucose and protein in aqueous solutions. This performance can slightly surpass that of spRS spectroscopy with equal or even longer integration times.
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.