ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Intra- and inter-rater reliability of medial elbow joint space width on static ultrasound images: a cross-sectional reliability study.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundQuantifying the reproducibility of ultrasound measurements of the medial elbow joint space is essential for interpreting changes over time and for comparing raters. However, measurement reliability under controlled, acquisition-independent conditions remains limited. Herein, we aimed to quantify the intra-rater repeatability and inter-rater agreement for static medial elbow ultrasound measurements exclusively focusing on the analytical (measurement) component in healthy elbows.
methodsIn this cross-sectional reliability study, 130 high-quality static ultrasound images from healthy elbows (13 elbows × 10 images each) were acquired by a single experienced examiner using standardized limb positioning and evaluated twice by seven orthopedic surgeons with varying ultrasound experience. The medial elbow joint space width was defined as the narrowest distance between the distal medial edge of the humeral trochlea and the proximal edge of the ulnar trochlear notch. Measurements were blinded and repeated following a ≥ 2-week interval. Reliability was assessed using the following intraclass correlation coefficients: ICC(1,1) for intra-rater repeatability and ICC(2,1) for inter-rater agreement, with error metrics expressed as the standard error of measurement (SEM) and the minimal detectable change at 95% confidence (MDC95). In addition, the mean, standard deviation, and range were calculated to provide reference values.
resultsIntra-rater ICC(1,1) spanned 0.860-0.973, with SEM 0.14-0.39 mm (MDC95 0.39-1.09 mm). Using two-session averages, inter-rater ICC(2,1) was found to be 0.872, with SEM 0.30 mm (MDC95 0.82 mm). Systematic measurement biases were observed, while more experienced raters showed narrower error ranges. The mean medial elbow joint space width in healthy elbows was 2.8 ± 0.8 mm (range 1.5-4.8 mm).
conclusionsIn this study of static ultrasound images from healthy elbows, intra-rater variability was found to be small, while inter-rater agreement was good among seven orthopedic surgeons with varying experience. These findings reflect measurement reproducibility under standardized static image conditions, independent of image acquisition variability. For practical interpretation, an inter-rater threshold of approximately 0.8-0.9 mm was required to exceed the measurement noise in this dataset, supporting the use of two-session averaging when feasible. Because the present study only evaluated the measurement component, these results likely represent the upper limit of achievable reliability in clinical practice.
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.