ArticleUltrasound (Leeds, England)2015
Successful implementation of a performance-related audit tool for sonographers.
Article in Ultrasound (Leeds, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- An exploration into physician and surgeon data sensemaking: a qualitative systematic review using thematic synthesis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Pooled it
- Embedding new technology into clinical ultrasound practice: Is role extension for sonographers the key to improving patient pathways?Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2023Review
- Making the transition from student to newly qualified vascular sonographer: An exploration of the domains of professionalism.Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2023Article
- Image and report quality in non-obstetric ultrasound examinations undertaken by sonographers: Results of an audit of 3731 cases.Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2022Article
- GP request rejections: an analysis for ultrasound service improvement at one centre.BMJ open quality · 2020Article
- Clinical measurements obtained from point-of-care ultrasound images to assess acquisition skills.The ultrasound journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A robust, sustainable audit programme for diagnostic ultrasound is hard to implement and establish. It requires time and resources to develop and to be relevant to clinical practice. There is a need for all ultrasound practitioners to undertake continuing professional development that underpins their roles and responsibilities within the workplace. A project group was established to evaluate how sonographers undertake Continuing Professional Development, with a view to understanding if implementing a performance-related audit process could support Continuing Professional Development. The group reviewed their clinical practice with an aim of developing a clinical governance and audit programme that could support both the needs of the service and sonographers alike. Our project has demonstrated that the implementation of this audit and case review process has positively contributed to our service and provided a more transparent and tangible account of sonographer performance.
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.