Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39670826›Full record

ReviewNanomedicine (London, England)2025

Advancements in nanotechnology for diagnostics: a literature review, part II: advanced techniques in nuclear and optical imaging.

Ahmad Butt, Horacio Bach

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nanomedicine (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

2 authors.

Ahmad ButtFaculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Horacio BachFaculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7740-9299

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern molecular imaging routes, such as nuclear imaging and optical imaging, derive significant advantages from nanoparticles, where multimodality use and multipurpose are key benefits. Nanoparticles also showcase benefits over traditional imaging agents in nuclear and optical imaging, including improved resolution, penetration, and specificity. The goal of this literature review was to explore recent advancements in nanomaterials within these molecular imaging techniques to expand on the current state of nanomedicine in these modalities. This review derives findings from relevant reviews, original research papers, in-human clinical trials, and patents in the literature. Au- and Fe oxide-based nanosystems are just as ubiquitous within more modern modalities due to their multimodal diagnostic and therapeutic potential. It is also repeatedly highlighted in the literature, patents, and clinical trials that the use of nanoparticles, specifically in multimodal imaging techniques and theranostics, present innovative methods in recent years, enabling researchers and clinicians to overcome the limitations of unimodal imaging modalities and further advancing accuracy in the diagnosis and treatment of important pathologies, particularly cancer. Overall, nanoparticle-based imaging represents a transformative approach in advanced imaging modalities, offering new approaches to limitations of conventional agents currently being applied in clinical settings.

Indexed as

NanotechnologyOptical ImagingAnimalsHumansMolecular ImagingMultimodal ImagingNanomedicineNanoparticlesNeoplasmsTheranostic Nanomedicineadvanced diagnosticscontrast agentsdiagnostic imagingmolecular imagingNanotechnologynuclear imagingoptical imaging (OI)theranostics

Identifiers

PMID39670826
PMCPMC11730800

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.