Observational studyBMC women's health2026
Reliability of shear wave elastography measurements of the linea alba: an intraclass correlation and Bland-Altman analysis.
Observational study in BMC women's health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDiastasis recti abdominis (DRA) is a common postpartum condition characterized by an increased separation between the rectus abdominis muscles along the linea alba, which may affect the stability of the abdomino-lumbo-pelvic complex and quality of life. Two-dimensional ultrasound is an established technique for assessing inter-rectus distance, whereas, more recently, shear wave elastography (SWE) has emerged as a promising method for quantifying tissue stiffness, although it is not yet fully established in clinical practice. However, before its routine use, it is necessary to establish the reliability of SWE measurements, considering factors such as anatomical location and examiner experience. This study aimed to determine intra- and inter-rater reliability of shear wave elastography for assessing the linea alba stiffness above and below the umbilicus in women with and without diastasis rectus abdominis.
methodsAn observational, cross-sectional study was conducted. Twenty-nine participants were included and two licensed examiners with different levels of elastography experience performed independent assessments on the same day, acquiring three SWE measurements above (AB5), at (UBO), and below (BL2) the umbilicus using a standardized protocol. Reliability was assessed using ICCs and Bland-Altman analysis.
resultsIntra-rater reliability was higher when three repeated measurements were averaged. For Examiner 1, mean-of-three ICCs ranged from 0.839 (95% CI 0.703-0.919) to 0.914 (95% CI 0.842-0.957), whereas for Examiner 2 they ranged from 0.662 (95% CI 0.371-0.831) to 0.800 (95% CI 0.630-0.899). Inter-rater reliability varied by anatomical location. For single examiner-specific mean values, ICC(A,1) was 0.439 (95% CI 0.086-0.692) at AB5, 0.517 (95% CI 0.187-0.741) at UBO, and 0.601 (95% CI 0.313-0.789) at BL2. For the mean of both examiners, ICC(A,2) was 0.610 (95% CI 0.159-0.818), 0.681 (95% CI 0.315-0.851), and 0.751 (95% CI 0.476-0.882), respectively. Bland-Altman analysis indicated minimal systematic bias and acceptable agreement: AB5, + 0.07 m/s (95% LoA - 2.74 to + 2.88); UBO, + 0.09 m/s (95% LoA - 2.63 to + 2.82); and BL2, - 0.21 m/s (95% LoA - 2.04 to + 1.63). Mean absolute errors ranged from 0.70 to 1.13 m/s, with no evidence of proportional bias.
conclusionShear-wave elastography (SWE) demonstrated acceptable-to-good reproducibility under standardized conditions, although reliability varied according to examiner and anatomical location. Averaging three repeated measurements improved intra-rater reliability, while inter-rater reliability was highest at BL2 and lowest at AB5. These findings require confirmation in larger studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42919325What 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.