ReviewJournal of biomedical optics2026
Phantoms for use in optical coherence elastography.
Review in Journal of biomedical optics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Optical coherence elastography (OCE) is an emerging biomedical imaging technique for mapping the micro-scale mechanical properties of tissue. Phantoms are vital for assessing OCE imaging performance in a controlled and systematic manner. Although the use of phantoms in OCE has been widely demonstrated, there is no consensus on suitable phantom materials or fabrication methods, limiting reproducibility and inter-laboratory comparison of OCE techniques. Aim: Our aim is to establish a unified framework for selecting, fabricating, and characterizing OCE phantoms by systematically evaluating the mechanical, optical, and structural properties of silicone, agar, and gelatin, the three most widely used OCE phantom materials. Approach: We conducted a literature review of phantom fabrication methods reported in OCE studies published between 1998 and 2025, comprising 223 papers, and identified silicone, agar, and gelatin as the most widely used OCE phantom materials. We experimentally characterized the elasticity, viscoelasticity, and attenuation coefficient of homogeneous phantoms fabricated from each material and investigated the effects of shelf life and optical scatterer concentration on mechanical properties. We further fabricated inclusion phantoms and tissue-mimicking surface roughness phantoms derived from optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans of human breast tissue using all three materials and evaluated their imaging performance using a compression OCE technique, quantitative micro-elastography (QME). Results: The elastic (tangent) modulus ranged from 7.2 to 175.9 kPa for silicone, 9.7 to 229.1 kPa for agar, and 3.5 to 29.4 kPa for gelatin, while OCT attenuation coefficients ranged from 0.2 to Conclusions: This study provides a framework to guide phantom material selection, fabrication, and characterization in OCE, identifying silicone as best suited for durable, predominantly elastic phantoms; agar for viscoelastic phantoms across a broad elasticity range; and gelatin for soft, highly viscoelastic phantoms. We believe that the results presented here will support standardization in OCE phantom development and will enable more detailed analysis, validation, and comparison of OCE techniques.
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.