Trial reportBMC medical imaging2026
Should pre-measurement physical activity be standardized in muscle thickness and stiffness evaluations? - A randomized controlled four arm cross-over study.
Trial report in BMC medical imaging, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh standardization is of crucial relevance for reliability in imaging diagnostics. When quantifying muscle properties (muscle thickness and stiffness) by ultrasound or myotonometry, internal validity can be compromised by examiner-related factors and participant biologic variability. A frequently neglected source of bias is pre-measurement activity, which may acutely alter muscle perfusion and muscle blood inflow.
methodsThe acute influence of different physical activity routines on tissue parameters was investigated in 30 healthy participants (16 m, 14f). Ten minutes before, immediately before, immediately after and 10 min retention of cycling, jogging, calf raises or control, muscle thickness and stiffness measurements via shear wave elastography (SWE) and myotonometry were measured.
resultsReliability was excellent for muscle thickness (ICC = 0.94-1.00; CV = 1.7-9.1%), good-excellent for SWE stiffness (ICC = 0.68-0.97; CV = up to 26% for inter-day) and myotonometry (muscle ICC = 0.77-0.98; CV = 4.0-17% tendon 0.86-0.93 (CV = 11-17%). Muscle thickness significantly increased after calf raises (d = 1.60, 10.3%) and jogging (d = 0.60, 3.0%), without effects after cycling or control. Shear-wave elastography showed muscle stiffness decreased after calf raises (d=-0.73, -16.7%). Myotonometry indicated a stiffness increase (d = 1.04, 20.1%). The 10-minute retention showed consistent effects for muscle thickness (d = 0.80, 5.3%) and stiffness (SWE: d = 0.78, 21.1%, myotonometry: d=-0.82, -13.0%).
conclusionPre-measurement activity could systematically affect muscle thickness and stiffness with dependence on activity type and intensity. This highlights the importance of monitoring pre-measurement activity to minimize potential reliability issues as this, depending on several potential moderators, could enhance the random error if within sample pre-measurement activity is not standardized. Before ultrasound evaluation, for some activity (i.e. calf raises), > 10 min of rest was required to diminish this bias.
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.