Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40231079›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

Multimodal diaphragmatic ultrasound indicators in healthy adults: reliability and consistency observation by ultrasound physician and critical care physician.

Haotian Zhao, Ling Long, Yi Liu, Yaru Yan, Xiaona Wang, Heling Zhao, Li Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Haotian ZhaoDepartment of Ultrasound, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Ling LongDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Yi LiuDepartment of Ultrasound, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Yaru YanDepartment of Ultrasound, Shijiazhuang People' Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Xiaona WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Heling ZhaoDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Li LiDepartment of Ultrasound, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to establish normal reference values for multimodal diaphragmatic ultrasound indices in healthy adult volunteers and evaluate intra-and inter-observer consistency between ultrasound physicians and critical care physicians. Methods: An ultrasound physician (US physician) used techniques such as B-mode, M-mode, Tissue Doppler Imaging (TDI), and shear wave elastography (SWE) to measure diaphragmatic parameters in 46 healthy adults during quiet and deep breathing. A critical care physician (CC physician) trained in diaphragmatic ultrasound repeated these measurements. Consistency was analyzed in intra-researcher and inter-researchers of various diaphragmatic ultrasound indicators. Results: Diaphragm thickness at the end of expiration, end of inspiration, and end of deep inspiration (DT-ee, DT-ei, and DT-edi) in both B-mode and M-mode method of males were higher than that of females, Diaphragm shear modulus-edi of males is higher than that of females ( Conclusion: Ultrasound-based assessment of diaphragmatic function is a reliable method. This study provides normal reference values and highlights the high observer reproducibility among experienced ultrasound and critical care physicians.

Indexed as

diaphragmatic functionhealthy adultsnormal valuesshear wave elastographyultrasound examination

Identifiers

PMID40231079
PMCPMC11994715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.