MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982369016 · doi:10.1002/lsm.20892

Assessment of photobleaching during endoscopic autofluorescence imaging of the lower GI tract

2010· article· en· W1982369016 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre Douplik, Dean Chen, Margarete K. Akens, Simon Zanati, Maria Cirocco, Nancy Bassett, Norman E. Marcon, John Fengler, Brian C. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueLasers in Surgery and Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkAXYS Technologies (Canada)Princess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersErlangen Graduate School of Advanced Optical Technologies
KeywordsAutofluorescencePhotobleachingIn vivoEndoscopyFluorescencePathologyEx vivoMedicineNuclear medicineChemistryBiomedical engineeringRadiologyOpticsBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In autofluorescence endoscopy, the difference in the fluorescence of intrinsic fluorophores is imaged to help visualize pre-malignant lesions, as in the system evaluated here. In this, blue light is used for excitation and the green autofluorescence is normalized by the red diffuse reflectance and presented using a false color scale. The present study was designed to quantify the degree of fluorescence photobleaching induced by the excitation light during use in the colon, since significant photobleaching could lead to false interpretation of the images, particularly false-positive lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Measurements were made ex vivo and in vivo, both using the endoscopic imaging system and a separate fiberoptic spectroscopy probe in externalized rat jejunum and in patients undergoing routine colonoscopy, using exposures typical of autofluorescence endoscopic examination. RESULTS: Photobleaching could be potentially caused at blue light exposure. However, at light intensities and exposure times that are typically used in clinical practice, the average photobleaching (% loss of peak fluorescence intensity) was <1% and <6% in the rat and human tissues, respectively. Nevertheless, the range was large: from -17% to +18% in rats and -33% to +43% in patients, where negative values denote an apparent increase in fluorescence. Both the large positive and negative deviations are believed in part to be due to a measurement artifact caused by uncontrollable tissue motility. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS: It is concluded that, using exposures typically encountered in clinical practice, there is minimal photobleaching during fluorescence endoscopy at exposure such as are used in the Onco-LIFE and comparable systems. The small changes in fluorescence intensity and spectral shift that do occur are not likely to be detectable by eye, and so should not impact significantly on the diagnostic accuracy of the technique.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLasers in Surgery and MedicineSame topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207