ArticleThe ultrasound journal2025
Examiner experience moderates reliability of human lower extremity muscle ultrasound measurement - a double blinded measurement error study.
Article in The ultrasound journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of muscle ultrasound in stroke rehabilitation: a review of calf muscle alterations and clinical implications.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Should pre-measurement physical activity be standardized in muscle thickness and stiffness evaluations? - A randomized controlled four arm cross-over study.BMC medical imaging · 2026Trial
- Stretch-mediated hypertrophy and strength increases and their impact on dynamic balance performance - a randomized controlled intervention study.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Methodological standards for body composition assessment-an expert-endorsed guide for research and clinical applications: bioimpedance, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, computerized tomography, and ultrasound methods.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Review
- Context-Dependent Differences in Muscle Architecture Following Fatigue in Ultramarathon Athletes: A Comparison Between Laboratory and Real Race Settings.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Muscle ultrasound and shear wave elastography for screening sarcopenia in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis: a prospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Intra- and inter-observer reliability of ultrasound muscle thickness of gluteal and biceps femoris long head in individuals with and without SCI.Clinical physiology and functional imaging · 2026Article
- Can measurement errors explain variance in the relationship between muscle- and tendon stiffness and range of motion?-a blinded reliability and objectivity study.European journal of applied physiology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Structural muscle properties are critical in health and athletic settings, with magnetic resonance imaging considered the gold standard assessment procedure under static conditions due to its reliability and objectivity. Practical limitations, including cost and accessibility, have led to the increasing use of ultrasound as an alternative for skeletal muscle morphological parameters. However, ultrasound measurements are sensitive to evaluation conditions and assessor experience, which has not been sufficiently explored, yet. Therefore, this study investigated the influence of assessor experience on the reliability of ultrasound measurements. A double-blind design was used, involving an experienced assessor (> 12,000 images for several years) and multiple inexperienced assessors (< 100 images) to collect data from 39 recreationally active participants. Measurements of muscle architecture were conducted in the leg muscles over two consecutive days, generating 1,248 ultrasound images. Relative and absolute reliability were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of measurement, minimal detectable change, mean absolute error (MAE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) and Bland-Altman analyses. Relative reliability was good to excellent in all measurement spots and time-points for muscle thickness (ICC = 0.76-0.98) irrespective of assessor experience, except for the inter-day comparison for the gastrocnemius lateralis by the inexperienced assessors, (ICC = 0.58). The pennation angle assessment ranged from insufficient to excellent reliability (ICC = 0.18-0.94) and experience contributed greatly to better results. The random error for the inexperienced assessors was reflected in two- to three-times higher MAEs/MAPEs and limits of agreement in the Bland-Altman analyses, respectively. The findings emphasize the importance of experience and standardization in achieving reliable ultrasound data, particularly for (a) sensitive parameters like the pennation angle and/or (b) inter-day, intra-subject comparisons.
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.