2015
DOI: 10.1117/3.2226012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optical Phantoms: Diffuse and Sub-diffuse Imaging and Spectroscopy Validation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

4
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2,11,12,25 Information regarding software requirements for converting reflectance spectra into optical parameters can be found elsewhere. 11,24,26 In regards to troubleshooting, spectra resulting in poor fits (average percent errors greater than 10% between raw data and fitted data) These simple improvements should fix the accurate fitting of sub-diffuse reflectance spectra, and if questions remain, spectra can be validated with phantoms with known optical properties (reduced scattering and absorption coefficients).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2,11,12,25 Information regarding software requirements for converting reflectance spectra into optical parameters can be found elsewhere. 11,24,26 In regards to troubleshooting, spectra resulting in poor fits (average percent errors greater than 10% between raw data and fitted data) These simple improvements should fix the accurate fitting of sub-diffuse reflectance spectra, and if questions remain, spectra can be validated with phantoms with known optical properties (reduced scattering and absorption coefficients).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since scattering contributes much more to reflectance intensity compared to absorption, the μ a was held constant at 0 cm −1 66 . Additionally, the phantom “epithelia” was made to be 300 μm thick to approximately simulate the thickness of oral mucosa 67 . With the understanding that the 374 and 730 μm SDSs sample different depths, it was expected that the 374 μm SDS may be more sensitive to shallower, epithelial-confined scattering changes associated with early dysplasia.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For each geometry in Fig. 4 , two 150 μm layers were stacked to generate the desired phantom 67 68 . The total phantom “epithelial” thickness was thus 300 μm, not including the “stromal” semi-infinite base layer, which was 1 cm thick.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The μ a was calculated by measuring a diluted solution of teal India ink in distilled water using a spectrophotometer (5102-00, PerkinElmer) and the Beer-Lambert Law. [18][19][20]26 A 5 × 3 (15 total) set of calibration phantoms was created, corresponding to five scattering ranges and three absorbing ranges ( Fig. 3).…”
Section: Optical Phantomsmentioning
confidence: 99%