ArticleBMJ open2026
Systematic review for reliability and validity of ultrasound imaging for femoral cartilage morphology and composition against MRI: protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
introductionEvaluating femoral cartilage morphology (eg, thickness) and composition (eg, water content) is important for understanding and managing knee conditions including knee pain and osteoarthritis. While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the reference standard for assessing cartilage morphology and composition, ultrasound imaging has gained increasing attention due to its affordability, accessibility and non-invasive nature. To date, the reliability and validity of ultrasound imaging for assessing femoral cartilage thickness and water content have not been thoroughly examined. This systematic review aims to evaluate the reliability and validity of ultrasound imaging for measuring femoral cartilage thickness and water content in individuals with and without knee pathology. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis was developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library will be searched for studies investigating the reliability and validity of ultrasound imaging for femoral cartilage thickness and water content. Studies published in English up to 1 April 2026 will be included. Risk of bias and methodological quality will be assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments checklist. Meta-analysis will be conducted when studies are sufficiently comparable in terms of population characteristics, imaging protocols and outcome definitions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because this study will synthesise data from previously published literature. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal related to orthopaedics, musculoskeletal imaging, or rehabilitation science, regardless of the results. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420261352774.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.