The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
In vivo assessment of diaphragm contraction by ultrasound in normal subjects.
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound allows observation of the thickness of the diaphragm in the zone of apposition in vivo during relaxation and maximum inspiratory efforts. METHODS: Changes of diaphragm thickness were studied by B mode (two dimensional) ultrasound in 13 healthy men aged 29-54 years in the seated position. A high resolution 7.5 MHz ultrasound transducer was held perpendicular to the chest wall in the line of a right intercostal space between the anteroaxillary and mid-axillary lines to observe the diaphragm in the zone of apposition 0.5-2 cm below the costophrenic angle. The changes of thickness were observed while breath holding at total lung capacity (TLC), functional residual capacity (FRC), and residual volume (RV). At FRC the thickness while relaxing against a closed mouthpiece and during a maximum inspiratory mouth pressure (PImax) manoeuvre was recorded. The thickening ratio (TR) was calculated as TR = thickness during PImax manoeuvre/thickness while relaxing. RESULTS: Mean (SD) thickness was 4.5 (0.9) mm at TLC, 1.7 (0.2) mm at FRC, and 1.6 (0.2) mm at RV. During the PImax manoeuvre at FRC mean thickness increased from 1.7 (0.2) mm during relaxation to 4.4 (1.4) mm, while mean PImax and TR were -104 (33) cm H2O and 2.6 (0.7), respectively. There was a high degree of correlation between TR and the pressure achieved during the maximum inspiratory manoeuvre (r = -0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound provides a non-invasive assessment of diaphragm thickness with change of lung volume and during the PImax manoeuvre which should prove useful in assessing diaphragm mass and contraction in respiratory and muscle disease.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
Cited by
Diaphragmatic Motion Studied by M-Mode Ultrasonography
Boussuges, A., Gole, Y., & Blanc, P. (2009) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.08-1541 · Cited by 760
Evolution of Diaphragm Thickness during Mechanical Ventilation. Impact of Inspiratory Effort
Goligher, E. C., Fan, E., Herridge, M. S., Murray, A., Vorona, S., Brace, D., Rittayamai, N., Lanys, A., Tomlinson, G., Singh, J. M., et al. (2015) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201503-0620oc · Cited by 608
Umbrello, M., Formenti, P., Longhi, D., Galimberti, A., Piva, I., Pezzi, A., Mistraletti, G., Marini, J. J., & Iapichino, G. (2015) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0894-9 · Cited by 343
Goligher, E. C., Laghi, F., Detsky, M. E., Farias, P., Murray, A., Brace, D., Brochard, L. J., Bolz, S.-S., Rubenfeld, G. D., Kavanagh, B. P., et al. (2015) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-015-3724-2 · Cited by 315
Farghaly, S., & Hasan, A. A. (2017) · Australian Critical Care · doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2016.03.004 · Cited by 159
Metadata
- Authors
- Ueki, J., De Bruin, P. F., & Pride, N. B.
- Venue
- Thorax
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1995-11-01
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1157-1161
- ISSN
- 0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1975781653
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: In vivo assessment of diaphragm contraction by ultrasound in normal subjects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thx.50.11.1157
- The paper
- Ueki, J., De Bruin, P. F., & Pride, N. B. (1995). In vivo assessment of diaphragm contraction by ultrasound in normal subjects. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.50.11.1157
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.