Evaluating fluorescence sensitivity on flow cytometers: an overview.

J C Wood; R A Hoffman

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9773888

Evaluating fluorescence sensitivity on flow cytometers: an overview.

J C Wood·R A Hoffman

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The current paradigms for assessing fluorescence sensitivity on flow cytometers do not provide an adequate assessment of an instrument's ability to detect and measure weak fluorescence on stained particles. The capability to resolve dimly stained populations depends on two factors: the background noise (B), and the efficiency (Q) with which the fluorescence from the fluorochrome molecules are converted to photoelectrons. Any single statistical measure of fluorescence histogram distributions will be unable to uniquely characterize an instrument. Therefore, neither of the routinely used methods (detection threshold and delta channel) measure sensitivity completely and unambiguously. We show the limitations of these methods and propose that instrument sensitivity be characterized in terms of both background noise and detection efficiency in order to determine better the capability to detect and resolve weakly fluorescent particles.

Explore related subjects

Evaluation Studies as Topic Flow Cytometry Fluorescence Fluorescent Dyes Sensitivity and Specificity Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

J C Wood, R A Hoffman. 1998-10-01. Evaluating fluorescence sensitivity on flow cytometers: an overview.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9773888/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Complex adaptive systems: a response to Luchins.

Luchins (2003, Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 31(2), 183-186) distinguishes the mutual strengths and shortcomings of qualitative and quantitative approaches as applied to the complexities of evaluation psychiatric hospital functioning in particular, and behavioral healthcare practice in general. This brief response offers an examination of the complex interplay of factors within non-linear models in a conceptualization of complex adaptive systems for understanding causal factors in mental health administration as well as calling into question the myth of the relationship between measurement and hence control and understanding and prediction.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗

PubMed2007

In search of a familial cancer risk assessment tool.

Approximately one in three individuals will be affected by cancer in their lifetime in the United States, and some are at elevated risk because of family history. Although assessment of family history of cancer and cancer risk is the standard of care, the current health-care system appears unable to meet this need. Because individuals are increasingly using the Internet, web-based cancer risk assessment tools (CRATs) may provide a way to meet this need. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the types of familial CRATs available on the Internet and their nature. The current review evaluated five CRATs identified through an Internet search based on (i) their ability to identify those at the highest risk of cancer (i.e. those with hereditary cancer syndromes), (ii) their strengths and limitations based on criteria adapted from Rich and colleagues (2004, 2005), (iii) their readability based on four readability calculations, and (iv) their quality based on criteria from Health on the Net. The general limitations of CRATs as a whole were also delineated, including concerns about availability to those who are poor and underserved and those who have lower levels of literacy. Recommendations for future tools include assessing risk for a greater number of diseases, using theoretically driven approaches to increase the likelihood that individuals will engage in appropriate health behaviors, and making a greater effort to reach diverse populations.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗

PubMed2007

Challenges in approaching metasynthesis research.

The overall aim of this study was to contribute to the development of metasynthesis through an analysis of the challenges involved. The study grew out of the critique of qualitative metaresearch raised by current developers of metamethodologies. Different views on the application of methodologies have emerged in the literature, contributing to confusion and ambiguity concerning the challenging questions of what, why, how, and who in metasynthesis research, which might increase the risk of misunderstanding. The roots of metasynthesis research are seen as multifaceted and influencing the development of the methods in different directions. The primary worth of metasynthesis is theoretical and/or methodological development (synthesis) combined with the potential for reflection: going beyond and behind the studies (meta). Metasynthesis research has also the potential to raise questions of research collaboration, culture, and language.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗