Observational studyMedicine2019
Learning curve-cumulative summation analysis of visual estimation of left ventricular function in novice practitioners: A STROBE-compliant article.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. 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.
- A graphical analysis of aspects contributing to the spreading of measurements of left ventricular function.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2023Observational
- Comparison of visual estimation and quantitative measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction in untrained perioperative echocardiographers.BMC anesthesiology · 2023Article
- Competency Assessment in Focused Cardiac Ultrasound-Can the Use of Sequential Testing Help Tailor Training Requirements?Critical care explorations · 2022Article
- Utility and diagnostic test properties of pulmonary and cardiovascular point of care ultra-sonography (POCUS) in COVID-19 patients admitted to critical care unit.European journal of radiology open · 2022Article
- Image quality to estimate ventricular ejection fraction by last year medical students improves after short courses of training.BMC medical education · 2019Article
- Combining Artificial Intelligence With Human Insight to Automate Echocardiography.Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to determine the value of cumulative summation (CUSUM) analysis in assessing the proficiency of novice practitioners in estimating the left ventricular ejection fraction (EF).Seven novice practitioners with no echocardiography experience were recruited in this observational study. Each practitioner assessed EF from echocardiographic video files of 100 cases, one by one, and received feedback and teaching. We obtained a CUSUM score through comparison of the gold standard values of EF and the EF values determined by the practitioners. Then, the practitioners underwent the same test 4 weeks later, except without feedback and teaching, using echocardiographic video files from 100 other cases.The mean number of visual estimation cases required to pass the learning curve (LC)-CUSUM test was 56.3 ± 9.1 (95% CI 47.8-64.7). The LC-CUSUM average of the 7 novice practitioners showed improvement in visual estimation skill, with an average acceptable level achieved after a mean experience of 55 cases. In the test performed after 4 weeks, 5 of the 7 novice practitioners showed significantly good overall agreement. All novice practitioners had a kappa coefficient greater than .8, and significant and almost perfect agreement was observed. All the participants exhibited a percentage of correct answers greater than 81%.We found that the novice practitioners could acquire an acceptable level of skill for estimating EF with short-term, self-learning-focused echocardiographic training.
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.