ReviewJournal of anatomy2022
Typical m. triceps surae morphology and architecture measurement from 0 to 18 years: A narrative review.
Review in Journal of anatomy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Architecture of lower leg muscles in children: Reference curves and potential mechanisms of growth.Journal of anatomy · 2026Article
- Effects of Aging on Motor Unit Properties in Isometric Elbow Flexion.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Gastrocnemius Neuromuscular Activation During Standing Explosive Acceleration.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Human lower leg muscles grow asynchronously.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
- Muscle morphology and architecture of the medial gastrocnemius between typically developing children with different ancestral background.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
- Typical m. triceps surae morphology and architecture measurement from 0 to 18 years: A narrative review.Journal of anatomy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this review was to report on the imaging modalities used to assess morphological and architectural properties of the m. triceps surae muscle in typically developing children, and the available reliability analyses. Scopus and MEDLINE (Pubmed) were searched systematically for all original articles published up to September 2020 measuring morphological and architectural properties of the m. triceps surae in typically developing children (18 years or under). Thirty eligible studies were included in this analysis, measuring fibre bundle length (FBL) (n = 11), pennation angle (PA) (n = 10), muscle volume (MV) (n = 16) and physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) (n = 4). Three primary imaging modalities were utilised to assess these architectural parameters in vivo: two-dimensional ultrasound (2DUS; n = 12), three-dimensional ultrasound (3DUS; n = 9) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; n = 6). The mean age of participants ranged from 1.4 years to 18 years old. There was an apparent increase in m. gastrocnemius medialis MV and pCSA with age; however, no trend was evident with FBL or PA. Analysis of correlations of muscle variables with age was limited by a lack of longitudinal data and methodological variations between studies affecting outcomes. Only five studies evaluated the reliability of the methods. Imaging methodologies such as MRI and US may provide valuable insight into the development of skeletal muscle from childhood to adulthood; however, variations in methodological approaches can significantly influence outcomes. Researchers wishing to develop a model of typical muscle development should carry out longitudinal architectural assessment of all muscles comprising the m. triceps surae utilising a consistent approach that minimises confounding errors.
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.