ReviewBiophysical reviews2026
A contemporary systematic review on deterministic numerical simulations of light propagation in head tissues.
Review in Biophysical reviews, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding how light interacts with the head's tissues is relevant for several biomedical applications. Since in vivo studies involve ethical considerations, numerical simulations have become a recognised alternative method for studying light propagation in biological tissue. Although Monte Carlo methods are the gold standard for these studies, deterministic simulations are becoming more common due to their lower computational cost. Thus, this document reviews articles published after 2010, containing deterministic numerical simulations of light propagation (visible to infrared wavelengths) in human head tissues, to define how these methods are implemented and whether they are a viable alternative to the stochastic Monte Carlo algorithms. Most of the selected articles included a 3D simulation, using Finite Element Methods (FEM) to solve the Diffusion Equation (DE), with Robin boundary conditions, and considering the tissues as horizontal rectangular layers, to improve imaging techniques' algorithms. Regarding target areas, there is an almost identical number of records studying the brain as a whole or dividing it into grey and white matter, while more studies consider the scalp and skull as individual layers instead of grouping them. The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was included in more than half of the studies, confirming that it is possible to simulate this tissue using the DE, if the optical parameters are adequate. Some of the challenges identified in the reported simulations are the variations in the optical properties of tissues (reduced scattering and absorption coefficients) and oversimplifications of the geometric models, which raise the question of whether using subject-specific data could improve the outcomes of light-based diagnosis and therapies. Although Monte Carlo methods are still the most commonly used for the simulation of optical properties, all the reviewed works reached comprehensive results, with most of them showing that deterministic numerical simulations can be an efficient and relatively accurate alternative to the time-consuming Monte Carlo methods. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12551-025-01403-w.
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.