ArticleJournal of ultrasound2024
Exploring discrepancies in muscle analysis with ImageJ: understanding the impact of tool selection on echo intensity and muscle area measurements.
Article in Journal of ultrasound, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Limits of Human Muscle Hypertrophy: A Case Study of a Mr. Olympia Competitor Bodybuilder.Journal of strength and conditioning research · 2026Article
- Influence of Sex on the Recovery Response Following Isometric Exercise Performed at Long Muscle Length.Journal of strength and conditioning research · 2026Article
- A pilot study on aging-related effects on step performance: The role of muscle quality, size, and strength.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Recovery response comparisons between variable resistance and long and short muscle length isometric exercise.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Quadriceps Muscle Morphology as a Marker of Performance Across Multiple Strength and Power Tests.Translational sports medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim was to compare the use of different tools within the ImageJ program (polygon vs. segmented line) and their impact on the calculation of muscle area and echo intensity (EI) values in ultrasound imaging of the vastus lateralis muscle.
methodsThirteen volunteers participated in this study. Ultrasound images of the vastus lateralis muscle were acquired using 2D B-mode ultrasonography and analyzed using both the polygon and segmented line tools by the same evaluator. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) assessed the tools' reliability. Bland-Altman plots were employed to verify the agreement between measurements, and linear regression analysis determined proportional bias. A paired t-test was conducted to analyze differences between the tools.
resultsThe reliability between tools for muscle area calculation was weak (r = 0.000; CV = 138.03 ± 0.34%), while it was excellent for EI (r = 0.871; CV = 15.19 ± 2.96%). The Bland-Altman plots indicated a large bias for muscle area (d = 195.2%) with a proportional bias (p < 0.001). For EI, the bias was (d = 15.2) with proportional bias (p = 0.028). The paired t-test revealed significant differences between the tools for area (p < 0.001) but not for EI (p = 0.060).
conclusionThe study found significant differences in measurements obtained with the polygon and segmented line tools in ImageJ, with the polygon tool showing higher values for muscle area and lower values for EI.
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.