ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of the inter-recti distance in nulliparous women measured in supine and standing positions using ultrasound imaging.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In physiotherapy for pregnancy-related diastasis recti abdominis, the inter-recti distance (IRD) measurement using ultrasound imaging is typically performed with the patient in supine position. Recently, a standing position, which is considered a functional body position, has been proposed for measurement. However, before adopting standing examination as routine, it is important to study how the linea alba behaves in this position in healthy nulliparas. The main objectives of the study were to compare (1) IRD at two measurement sites between standing and supine positions, and (2) IRD between the two sites within each position. IRD measurements were taken using ultrasound imaging in 27 nulliparas, at the upper edge of the umbilicus (umbilical site) and midway between the superior umbilical border and the xiphoid process (umbilical-xiphoid site), in both supine and standing positions. Photographs were taken to monitor participants' standing posture. At the umbilical-xiphoid site, the mean IRD was greater when standing than when supine (p = 0.004); no significant difference was observed at the umbilical site (p = 0.07). The mean IRD at the umbilicus was greater than at the umbilical-xiphoid site (p = 0.00001). The IRD at the midpoint between the superior umbilical border and the xiphoid process changed when assuming the standing position, which was not observed at the superior umbilical border. The IRD was greater in the umbilical region compared to the area further away from the umbilicus cranially. Our findings provide baseline data for future research on symptomatic populations and for establishing normative IRD values in the standing position, which could aid in developing clinical guidelines for assessing diastasis recti abdominis.
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.