MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787915827 · doi:10.1039/c7an01871a

Clinical applications of infrared and Raman spectroscopy: state of play and future challenges

2018· review· en· W2787915827 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew J. Baker, Hugh J. Byrne, John M. Chalmers, Peter Gardner, Royston Goodacre, Alex Henderson, Sergei G. Kazarian, Julian Moger, Nicholas Stone, Josep Sulé‐Suso

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research
Canadian institutionsKensington Health
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsRaman spectroscopyInfraredInfrared spectroscopySpectroscopyState (computer science)Materials scienceNanotechnologyComputer scienceChemistryPhysicsOpticsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vibrational spectroscopies, based on infrared absorption and/or Raman scattering provide a detailed fingerprint of a material, based on the chemical content. Diagnostic and prognostic tools based on these technologies have the potential to revolutionise our clinical systems leading to improved patient outcome, more efficient public services and significant economic savings. However, despite these strong drivers, there are many fundamental scientific and technological challenges which have limited the implementation of this technology in the clinical arena, although recent years have seen significant progress in addressing these challenges. This review examines (i) the state of the art of clinical applications of infrared absorption and Raman spectroscopy, and (ii) the outstanding challenges, and progress towards translation, highlighting specific examples in the areas of in vivo, ex vivo and in vitro applications. In addition, the requirements of instrumentation suitable for use in the clinic, strategies for pre-processing and statistical analysis in clinical spectroscopy and data sharing protocols, will be discussed. Emerging consensus recommendations are presented, and the future perspectives of the field are assessed, particularly in the context of national and international collaborative research initiatives, such as the UK EPSRC Clinical Infrared and Raman Spectroscopy Network, the EU COST Action Raman4Clinics, and the International Society for Clinical Spectroscopy.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations227
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical ResearchFrench-language works237,207