Cited by 470Optical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyElasticity and Material Modeling

Biomechanical Properties of In Vivo Human Skin From Dynamic Optical Coherence Elastography

Open access
Xing Liang, Boppart, S.A.·2010·IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering

Abstract

Dynamic optical coherence elastography is used to determine in vivo skin biomechanical properties based on mechanical surface wave propagation. Quantitative Young's moduli are measured on human skin from different sites, orientations, and frequencies. Skin thicknesses, including measurements from different layers, are also measured simultaneously. Experimental results show significant differences among measurements from different skin sites, between directions parallel and orthogonal to Langer's lines, and under different skin hydration states. Results also suggest surface waves with different driving frequencies represent skin biomechanical properties from different layers in depth. With features such as micrometer-scale resolution, noninvasive imaging, and real-time processing from the optical coherence tomography technology, this optical measurement technique has great potential for measuring skin biomechanical properties in dermatology.

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.2009.2033464

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liang, X., & Boppart, S. A.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Corresponding author
Boppart, S.A.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
Published
2010-04
Volume
57
Issue
4
Pages
953-959
ISSN
0018-9294 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2133147905
Cited by
470
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R21EB005321, R01EB005221)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Optical Coherence Tomography Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Elasticity and Material Modeling
Keywords
skin biomechanics, Young's modulus, skin thickness, Langer's lines, skin hydration, surface wave propagation, skin layers, non-invasive skin imaging, dermatology
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Arm, Biomechanical Phenomena, Humans, Male, Skin Physiological Phenomena, Poisson Distribution, Tomography, Optical Coherence, Elasticity Imaging Techniques, Elastic Modulus

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