ArticlePhotoacoustics2026
Application of a virtual imaging framework for investigating a deep learning-based reconstruction method for 3D quantitative photoacoustic computed tomography.
Article in Photoacoustics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A virtual imaging framework for three-dimensional quantitative optoacoustic tomography using stochastic numerical breast phantoms.Photoacoustics · 2026Article
- Deep learning-driven quantitative spectroscopic photoacoustic imaging for segmentation and oxygen saturation estimation.Ultrasonics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitative photoacoustic computed tomography (qPACT) is a promising imaging modality for estimating physiological parameters such as blood oxygen saturation. However, developing robust qPACT reconstruction methods remains challenging due to computational demands, modeling difficulties, and experimental uncertainties. Learning-based methods have been proposed to address these issues but remain largely unvalidated. Virtual imaging (VI) studies are essential for validating such methods early in development, before proceeding to less-controlled phantom or in vivo studies. Effective VI studies must employ ensembles of stochastically generated numerical phantoms that accurately reflect relevant anatomy and physiology. Yet, most prior VI studies for qPACT relied on overly simplified phantoms. In this work, a realistic VI testbed is employed for the first time to assess a representative 3D learning-based qPACT reconstruction method for breast imaging. The method is evaluated across subject variability and physical factors such as measurement noise and acoustic aberrations, offering insights into its strengths and limitations.
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.