ReviewLab on a chip2026
Three-dimensional imaging flow cytometry: current trends and future perspectives.
Review in Lab on a chip, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Imaging flow cytometry (IFC) combines microscopic techniques and flow cytometry, enabling high-throughput, population-scale single-cell analysis with rich spatial detail and high molecular specificity. To date, most established IFC platforms are fundamentally built around 2D imaging, which is inherently limited in its ability to capture the complex 3D morphology, intracellular organization, and spatially distributed molecular features of single cells under flow. Driven by the growing demand for volumetric cellular information, IFC has progressively evolved from 2D imaging toward 3D imaging flow cytometry through a variety of optical and computational strategies. Existing 3D IFC approaches typically fall into scanning-based and non-scanning modalities, depending on whether volumetric information is assembled through sequential or parallel acquisition, with each paradigm offering complementary strengths in 3D imaging performance and cytometric throughput. Here, we systematically compare the underlying principles and performance characteristics of the most representative scanning-based and non-scanning 3D IFC technologies and discuss current challenges and future opportunities to advance volumetric cytometric analysis in biomedical and translational research.
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.