ArticleFoot & ankle orthopaedics2026
Navicular Height by Weight-bearing Ultrasound: A Reliable and Valid Tool for Assessing the Medial Longitudinal Arch in Physically Active Adults.
Article in Foot & ankle orthopaedics, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The medial longitudinal arch (MLA) height is an important clinical indicator of foot posture, linked to injury risk and rehabilitation targets. Assessment of navicular height (NH) in standing position is commonly used as a marker of MLA height. Methods such as palpation and imaging face limitations with operator variability, accessibility, and radiation exposure. Ultrasonography may be a practical alternative, but its reliability compared to established methods needs further evaluation. The research objective was to assess the reliability and validity of plantar ultrasonographic navicular height measures (US-NH) in standing position using a novel ultrasonography platform. Methods: A test-retest study design was adopted across 2 cohorts: cohort study 1 (CS1, 2023; n = 16) and cohort study 2 (CS2, 2024; n = 30), using the standing ultrasonography platform. Intra- and inter-rater intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were assessed to evaluate method reliability. Validity was assessed using cadaveric dissection as a gold standard. Results: US-NH demonstrated excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC 0.956, 95% CI: 0.934-0.971), improving from good reliability in CS1 (ICC 0.827, 95% CI: 0.675-0.912) to excellent in CS2 (ICC 0.981, 95% CI: 0.969-0.989) after methodologic refinements. Inter-rater reliability also increased markedly, from poor in CS1 (ICC 0.459, 95% CI: 0.240-0.819) to excellent in CS2 (ICC 0.964, 95% CI: 0.940-0.978), indicating reduced operator-dependent variability. Dissection confirmed the bone visualised with weight-bearing ultrasonography corresponded accurately to the plantar navicular surface. Conclusion: Ultrasonography is a reliable, valid, and radiation-free method for measuring navicular height, in a physically active population. Dissections demonstrated the high validity of ultrasonographic assessment when compared to direct anatomical measurement. Level of Evidence: Level V, mechanism-based reasoning.
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.