3 ms·
Is this likely to be less risk than xray or nmr mri for comparable imaging quality?
by ggm 1y ago
Is this likely to be less risk than xray or nmr mri for comparable imaging quality?
- jocaal 1y agoThis will probably never get the image quality of either of those. The image quality you get is proportional to the density of the detecting elements. These types of infrared methods usually have to touch the skin, so you would need a flexible array of detectors and your not going to get the same quality with that.
- ars 1y agoYou could solve that by scanning across the skin, and immersing the side of the head and the detector in some kind of fluid that helps light transmission (avoids reflections on the skin), so you don't actually have to touch the skin.
- metalman 1y agoinserting a medical light bulb in the pattients mouth will decrease the distance the light has to travel, and presumably it could be a high intensity "flash" tuned to conditions with very precisely known timing
- ars 1y agoYes, less risk, but the image quality is non-existent - at least as of right now.
- freehorse 1y agoYes. They use 800nm wavelength which is near infrared. I don't think this can give a structural image, but not sure what this can be used whatsover. It is probably more comparable to fmri because the technique, applied on short source-detector paths, is usually showing fluctuations in oxygenation levels in the cortex, as proxy of brain activity, but in contrast to fmri it could not go deeper into subcortical structures of the brain.