ArticleNeurophotonics2024
How the heterogeneity of the severely injured brain affects hybrid diffuse optical signals: case examples and guidelines.
Article in Neurophotonics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward comprehensive multimodal neuromonitoring of surrogates of cerebral autoregulation in traumatic brain injury: insights from a hyperventilation protocol.Neurophotonics · 2026Article
- Depth-sensitive cerebral blood flow and low-frequency oscillations for consciousness assessment using time-domain diffuse correlation spectroscopy.Neurophotonics · 2026Article
- Reproducibility of a time-resolved NIRS, multidistance diffuse correlation spectroscopy system: towards noninvasive longitudinal neuromonitoring.Neurophotonics · 2026Article
- Comparison of diffuse correlation spectroscopy, interferometric diffusing wave spectroscopy, and speckle contrast optical spectroscopy for blood flow monitoring.Neurophotonics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: A shortcoming of the routine clinical use of diffuse optics (DO) in the injured head has been that the results from commercial near-infrared spectroscopy-based devices are not reproducible, often give physiologically invalid values, and differ among systems. Besides the limitations due to the physics of continuous-wave light sources, one culprit is the head heterogeneity and the underlying morphological and functional abnormalities of the probed tissue. Aim: The aim is to investigate the effect that different tissue alterations in the damaged head have on DO signals and provide guidelines to avoid data misinterpretation. Approach: DO measurements and computed tomography scans were acquired on brain-injured patients. The relationship between the signals and the underlying tissue types was classified on a case-by-case basis. Results: Examples and suggestions to establish quality control routines were provided. The findings suggested guidelines for carrying out DO measurements and speculations toward improved devices. Conclusions: We advocate for the standardization of the DO measurements to secure a role for DO in neurocritical care. We suggest that blind measurements are unacceptably problematic due to confounding effects and care using
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.