ArticlePhysiological reports2025
Reliability of popliteal artery flow-mediated dilation in the seated position.
Article in Physiological reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reliability of popliteal artery flow-mediated dilation in the seated position.Physiological reports · 2025Article
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
Flow-mediated dilation (FMD), a noninvasive measure of endothelial function, is commonly measured in the popliteal artery in the supine and upright body positions. However, reliability studies of the measurement in these positions are not well studied. This study aimed to examine the trial-retrial and visit-to-visit reliability of popliteal artery FMD in the seated position. Popliteal artery FMD was measured in 20 healthy adults across two visits in the seated and prone positions to assess visit-to-visit reliability. Two measurements were taken for each body position at each visit to assess trial-retrial reliability. %FMD was calculated as the percent change from baseline diameter to peak diameter. The reliability of FMD was assessed via the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Popliteal artery %FMD shows moderate-to-good reliability in the seated position (ICC: 0.67-0.89) and poor-to-moderate reliability in the prone position (ICC: 0.25-0.74) within and between visits. There were no significant differences in baseline diameter or minimum diameter between body positions, visits, or trials (p > 0.05). %FMD and peak diameter following cuff deflation demonstrated no significant difference between body positions (p > 0.05). Popliteal artery FMD demonstrates good reliability in the seated position, supporting the development of a standardized measurement protocol.
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.