ArticleUltrasound (Leeds, England)2019
Echo intensity reliability between two rectus femoris probe sites.
Article in Ultrasound (Leeds, England), 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.
- Ex-vivo validation of spatial gain sonography for the quantification of echo intensity in fascicle-aligned ultrasound images in ten anatomical muscles in Bos taurus.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
- Ultrasound Imaging Analysis of the Lumbar Multifidus Muscle Echo Intensity: Intra-Rater and Inter-Rater Reliability of a Novice and an Experienced Rater.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- Exercise induced changes in echo intensity within the muscle: a brief review.Journal of ultrasound · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe ultrasound technique has been extensively used to measure echo intensity, with the goal of measuring muscle quality, muscle damage, or to detect neuromuscular disorders. However, it is not clear how reliable the technique is when comparing different days, raters, and analysts, or if the reliability is affected by the muscle site where the image is obtained from. The goal of this study was to compare the intra-rater, inter-rater, and inter-analyst reliability of ultrasound measurements obtained from two different sites at the rectus femoris muscle.
methodsMuscle echo intensity was quantified from ultrasound images acquired at 50% [RF
resultsEcho intensity values were higher (
conclusionsThe differences in echo intensity values between positions suggest that rectus femoris's structure is not homogeneous, and therefore measurements from different muscle regions should not be used interchangeably. Both sites showed a high reliability, meaning that the measure is accurate if performed by the same experienced rater in different days, if performed by different experienced raters in the same day, and if analyzed by different well-trained analysts, regardless of the evaluated muscle site.
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.