MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413368729 · doi:10.3389/fphot.2025.1636398

Absorption, scattering, and refractive index of blood and its components: a review

2025· article· en· W4413368729 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Photonics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDigital Holography and Microscopy
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAbsorption (acoustics)Refractive indexScatteringIndex (typography)Materials scienceOpticsPhysicsComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blood is a complex biofluid with distinct optical characteristics that underpin a range of diagnostic and monitoring technologies. This review examines the absorption, scattering, and refractive index properties of whole blood and its components across the visible and near-infrared spectrum. Blood’s optical properties are determined primarily by water, hemoglobin, and its encapsulation in red blood cells. Hemoglobins dominate blood’s light absorption in the 400–1,100 nm range, with sharp spectral differences between oxygenated and deoxygenated forms. Scattering in whole blood is primarily due to red blood cells and is influenced by hematocrit, oxygenation, shear rate, and osmolarity. Reduced scattering coefficients are close to 13 cm −1 in the whole visible range of the spectrum, and the anisotropy factor is close to unity, indicating highly forward-directed scattering. While other blood cells (white blood cells and platelets) do not contribute significantly to blood’s optical properties, their scattering properties are used in many biomedical applications. We also highlight the role of the geometry of experiment—including detour, sieve, and self-shielding phenomena—in shaping blood’s optical response. Multiple clinical technologies, such as pulse oximetry, are based on blood’s optical properties. Recently reported discrepancies between consumer and clinical devices highlight the need for more accurate models of blood optics for emerging biomedical and wearable sensing applications.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.234 · 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