Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,095

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Evaluation of a Laser Doppler Flowmeter for Measurement of Tissue Blood Flow

Nilsson, Gert E., Tenland, Torsten, Oberg, P. Ake·1980·IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering

Abstract

An instrument for measurement of tissue blood flow based on the laser Doppler principle was evaluated using a fluid model. A unique and linear relationship between flowmeter response and flux of red cells was demonstrated with red cell velocities and volume fractions within the normal physiological range of the microcirculatory network of the skin. Different degrees of oxygenation proved to influence the Doppler signal only to a minor extent. The study also shows that the Doppler signal is formed essentially by heterodyne mixing of light beams backscattered in static structures and moving red cells.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tbme.1980.326582

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Nilsson, G. E., Tenland, T., & Oberg, P. A.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
Published
1980-10
Volume
BME-27
Issue
10
Pages
597-604
ISSN
0018-9294 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2050727424
Cited by
1,095
References
0
FWCI
11.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.