ArticlePloS one2019
Accuracy and precision of ultrasound shear wave elasticity measurements according to target elasticity and acquisition depth: A phantom study.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of prolonged sitting immobility on shear wave velocity of the lower leg muscles in healthy adults: A proof-of-concept study.PloS one · 2021Trial
- Shear Wave Elastography Acquisition Parameters May Bias Shear Wave Velocity Measurements.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2025Article
- Endocrine Tumor Classification via Machine-Learning-Based Elastography: A Systematic Scoping Review.Cancers · 2023Article
- Prolonged Sitting Causes Leg Discomfort in Middle Aged Adults: Evaluation of Shear Wave Velocity, Calf Circumference, and Discomfort Questionaries.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Biomechanical Properties of Strictures in Crohn's Disease: Can Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography and Magnetic Resonance Enterography Predict Stiffness?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the accuracy and precision of ultrasound shear wave elasticity measurements as a function of target elasticity and acquisition depth. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing five ultrasound systems (VTQ, VTIQ, EPIQ 5, Aixplorer, and Aplio 500), two operators independently measured shear wave elasticities in two phantoms containing five different target elasticities (8±3, 14±4, 25±6, 45±8, and 80±12 kPa) at depths of 15, 30, 35, and 60 mm. Accuracy was assessed by evaluating measurement errors and the proportions of outliers, while factors affecting accuracy were assessed using logistic regression analysis. Measurement errors were defined as differences between the measured values and 1) the margins of the target elasticity, and 2) the median values of the target elasticity. Outliers were defined as measured values outside the margins of the target elasticity. Precision was assessed by calculating the reproducibility of measurements using the within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV).
resultsMean measurement errors and the proportions of outliers were higher for high than for low target elasticities (p<0.001), but did not differ in relation to acquisition depth, either within an elastography system or across the different systems. Logistic regression analysis showed that target elasticity (p<0.001) significantly affected accuracy, whereas acquisition depth (p>0.05) did not. The wCV for the 80±12 kPa target (31.33%) was significantly higher than that for lower elasticity targets (6.96-10.43 kPa; p<0.001). The wCV did not differ across acquisition depths. The individual elastography systems showed consistent results.
conclusionsTargets with high elasticity showed lower accuracy and lower precision than targets with low elasticity, while acquisition depth did not show consistent patterns in either accuracy or precision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.