Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42006863›Full record

ArticleNeurophotonics2026

Comparative validation of speckle contrast optical spectroscopy against diffuse correlation spectroscopy for monitoring human cerebral blood flow.

Tom Y Cheng, Mitchell B Robinson, Marco Renna, Kuan-Cheng Wu, Zachary Starkweather, Olivia S Kierul, Byungchan Kenny Kim, Alexander C Howard, David A Boas, Stefan A Carp and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurophotonics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors.

Tom Y ChengMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3220-7471
Mitchell B RobinsonMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5810-0459
Marco RennaMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6642-7360
Kuan-Cheng WuMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7794-8022
Zachary StarkweatherMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Olivia S KierulMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Byungchan Kenny KimBoston University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5144-7644
Alexander C HowardBoston University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5943-0967
David A BoasBoston University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6709-7711
Stefan A CarpMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4617-3233
Xiaojun ChengBoston University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3568-0603
Maria Angela FranceschiniMassachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6758-423X

Funding

SNSPD-DCS at 1064 nm for non-invasive monitoring of cerebral perfusion and intracranial pressure in the ICUU01EB034228 · NIBIB · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Maria Angela Franceschini · 2023 to 2026
$2.9M
Low-Cost High-Performance NIRS-SCOS Device for Non-Invasive Monitoring of Cerebral Blood Flow and Intracranial Pressure in Traumatic Brain InjuryR01NS135081 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Maria Angela Franceschini · 2024 to 2026
$2.0M
A transformative method for functional brain imaging with Speckle Contrast Optical SpectroscopyUG3EB034710 · NIBIB · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI BOAS, DAVID A, CHENG, XIAOJUN · 2023 to 2025
$1.1M
Graduate Training at the Interface of Neuroscience, Optical Engineering and Data ScienceT32NS136080 · NINDS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI David A Boas, Jerry L Chen · 2024 to 2026
$661k
NIBIB NIH HHS U01 EB034228NIBIB NIH HHS UG3 EB034710NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS135081NINDS NIH HHS T32 NS136080
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significance: Within diffuse optics, speckle contrast optical spectroscopy (SCOS) has emerged as a promising alternative to the state-of-the-art technique of diffuse correlation spectroscopy (DCS) for continuous, noninvasive bedside monitoring of cerebral blood flow (CBF). Although the two methods theoretically yield equivalent relative indices of CBF (rCBFi), in practice, SCOS-based measurements require experimental calibration to obtain unbiased rCBFi values. To date, there are limited validation studies comparing SCOS and DCS in human subjects, particularly at long source-detector separations (SDS) relevant to adult brain monitoring. Aim: We aim to compare rCBFi from SCOS and DCS during concurrent, colocalized measurements on tissue-mimicking phantoms and humans at a large SDS of 3 cm. Approach: We conducted concurrent SCOS and DCS measurements on temperature-ramped, two-layer, and flow phantoms, respectively. We also conducted concurrent CBF measurements on 10 healthy volunteers undergoing various physiological challenges (breath-holding, hyperventilation, pressure modulation, and squatting) designed to elicit measurable changes in blood flow. SCOS and DCS operated from a shared pulsed laser source, which enabled pulsation-resolved human CBF measurements at 3 cm SDS (DCS necessitated the use of cardiac-gated averaging). Results: We observed strong agreement ( Conclusions: The results demonstrate the equivalence of properly calibrated SCOS and DCS rCBFi measurements at long SDS in adults, establishing SCOS as a viable alternative to DCS for monitoring CBF. Further validation across larger cohorts and clinical populations is warranted.

Indexed as

cerebral blood flowdiffuse correlation spectroscopypulsatile waveformspeckle contrast optical spectroscopytwo-layer phantom

Identifiers

PMID42006863
PMCPMC13086003

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.