Advances in translational imaging of the microcirculation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The past few decades have seen an explosion in the development and use of methods for imaging the human microcirculation during health and disease. The confluence of innovative imaging technologies, affordable computing power, and economies of scale have ushered in a new era of "translational" imaging that permit us to peer into blood vessels of various organs in the human body. These imaging techniques include near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), positron emission tomography (PET), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that are sensitive to microvascular-derived signals, as well as computed tomography (CT), optical imaging, and ultrasound (US) imaging that are capable of directly acquiring images at, or close to microvascular spatial resolution. Collectively, these imaging modalities enable us to characterize the morphological and functional changes in a tissue's microcirculation that are known to accompany the initiation and progression of numerous pathologies. Although there have been significant advances for imaging the microcirculation in preclinical models, this review focuses on developments in the assessment of the microcirculation in patients with optical imaging, NIRS, PET, US, MRI, and CT, to name a few. The goal of this review is to serve as a springboard for exploring the burgeoning role of translational imaging technologies for interrogating the structural and functional status of the microcirculation in humans, and highlight the breadth of current clinical applications. Making the human microcirculation "visible" in vivo to clinicians and researchers alike will facilitate bench-to-bedside discoveries and enhance the diagnosis and management of disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".