Standardizing Laser Speckle Orthogonal Contrast Imaging: Achieving Reproducible Measurements across Instruments

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper compares the accuracy and stability of results produced by two LSOCI systems, a modification of LSCI developed by the authors/their team, to gauge its suitability for clinical applications. Here are some questions and suggestions that I hope will help the authors improve the paper:

·       I would suggest the authors form a complete paragraph at the beginning of the introduction (lines 10-26). For me, paragraphs containing one sentence from the outset disrupts flow and makes for a jarring read. Try to construct paragraphs consistently in the paper (there are some very large paragraphs and some single sentence paragraphs).

·       Why is 3mm depth “interesting” (line 40)?

·       Perhaps the authors could briefly describe how the relative movement was reduced in the first instance (lines 43-45), e.g. they are in contact with the skin in order to minimize relative movement between patient and instrument.

·       Please expand the acronym VMAI in the first instance (line 125).

·       How is 1/T eliminated when C=1? I/T is still present in Eq. 2 when C=1 (lines 151-152).

·       Perhaps the sentence commencing on line 187 would read better by replacing “contribute to a non-negligible random contribution” to “are non-negligible”.

·       The colour of the circles in Fig. 3 should be changed as the difference between green and blue are at first hard to distinguish.

·       Perhaps the sentence commencing on line 262 would read better by removing “An overall comment reveals that”.

·       Typo in line 278 (capital D).

·       I would recommend changing “However, further improvements can be performed” to something resembling “However, further improvements can be made by optimising the calibration method across various numerical apertures and laser spectral widths, …” (line 299).

·       The wording of final sentence needs improvement (lines 301-303).

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English need to be improved, as it appeared that this manuscript was written by multiple different writing styles.

Author Response

Please find our answer in the attached file.

Thank you again,

Sincerely,

Xavier Orlik

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors propose a calibration approach that treats each imaging system as an integrated unit, including the laser source, optics, and camera. The method utilizes the unique calibration parameter of each instrument, the maximum spatial contrast that can be obtained at a given acquisition parameter, while imaging a static scatterer that generates a circular Gaussian speckle field. The overall content of the article has a certain readability, but there are the following problems:

1. The abstract contains less content and does not highlight the core content of the article.

2. In the introduction part, there is no comparison of other similar studies and no summary of previous technologies.

3. The logic of the article needs to be strengthened.

4. In the summary part, the advantages of the improved parts of this paper compared with other similar studies are not mentioned, and the core of the paper is not highlighted.

5. Fewer papers are cited.

Author Response

Please find our answer in the attached files.

Thank you again,

Sincerely,

Xavier Orlik

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

By using near-infrared light, the authors' group has succeeded in capturing images of microvessels at a depth of 3 mm from the surface with a spatial resolution of 80 microns. Furthermore, in this manuscript, the authors have demonstrated two points required for practical treatment: quantification and repeatability.

Specifically, by comparing the results of tracking the progression of abdominal scratching over time using two imaging systems using the LSOCI method, the authors clearly showed that the microcirculatory patterns and measurements were highly consistent between both imaging systems.

Therefore, I consider it appropriate to publish this manuscript in its current form in "Photonics."

Author Response

Please find our answer in the attached files.

Thank you again,

Sincerely,

Xavier Orlik

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf