ArticleJournal of synchrotron radiation2025
High magnification optical imaging systems for the characterization of soft X-ray focii.
Article in Journal of synchrotron radiation, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We present a series of novel X-ray imaging systems designed specifically for the soft X-ray energy range, optimized for operation in ultra-high-vacuum environments and compactness. These systems achieve micrometre-level spatial resolution with high collection efficiency of visible light by using high numerical aperture optics. Comprehensive characterization of the systems' response was performed, including linearity assessments and X-ray sensitivity measurements, across X-ray photon densities ranging from 1 nJ m
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.