ArticleUltrasound (Leeds, England)2015
Ultrasound clinical progress monitoring: Who, where and how?
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.
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.
- Developing preceptorship programmes by exploring the needs of newly qualified sonographers through the lens of experienced ultrasound preceptors.Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2025Article
- Adaptation of an anatomy graduate course in ultrasound imaging from in-person to live, remote instruction during the Covid-19 pandemic.Anatomical sciences education · 2022Article
- Use of an Online Ultrasound Simulator to Teach Basic Psychomotor Skills to Medical Students During the Initial COVID-19 Lockdown: Quality Control Study.JMIR medical education · 2021Article
- Neonatal brain ultrasound training for beginners: Could a head phantom be useful?Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2020Article
- Educating the future sonographic workforce: membership survey report from the British Medical Ultrasound Society.Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2015Article
- The use of simulation in medical ultrasound: Current perspectives on applications and practical implementation (WFUMB state-of-the-art paper).Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prior to assessment of final ultrasound clinical competency it is important to monitor clinical progress, provide high quality feedback and encourage skills development. The role of the supervisor, mentor and assessor are fundamental to the on-going progress monitoring of ultrasound trainees. This article forms the second part of a larger project which was to elicit ultrasound practitioners' opinions on how progress should be monitored, where and by whom. An on-line questionnaire was used to gain opinions from ultrasound practitioners. Totally, 116 responses were received from professionals with an interest in ultrasound assessment. Results suggested that experienced, qualified ultrasound practitioners should undertake the role of supervisor and assessor, having been prepared for that role by the training centre. Formative monitoring should take place both within the clinical department and possibly the training centre, using a range of methods. Following completion of the training, practitioners should have a preceptorship period to consolidate their knowledge and skills for 3 to 6 months or until further competencies have been demonstrated. Formative progress monitoring should be a recognised part of ultrasound training. Essentially, staff undertaking supervision and assessor roles should be supported and trained to ensure a high quality, consistent learning experience for ultrasound trainees. Additionally, they should provide appropriate feedback to the trainee and education centre.
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.