Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31208078›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Hand-Held Ultrasound Devices Compared with High-End Ultrasound Systems: A Systematic Review.

Alexander Rykkje, Jonathan Frederik Carlsen, Michael Bachmann Nielsen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05870345 (The Diagnostic Accuracy of Pocket Size Ultrasound), which is not on this map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05870345 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Pocket Size Ultrasound (PsUS) in the Detection of Pediatric Elbow Fractures

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ChicagoRan2022 to 2023Enrolled35ConditionsElbow Injury, Elbow FractureArmsButterfly IQ
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Assessment of residual gastric volume by ultrasound prior to upper endoscopy: a prospective cohort study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alexander RykkjeDepartment of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. alex_r@me.com.
Jonathan Frederik CarlsenDepartment of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. jonathan.carlsen@gmail.com.
Michael Bachmann NielsenDepartment of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. mbn@dadlnet.dk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to review the scientific literature available on the comparison of hand-held ultrasound devices with high-end systems for abdominal and pleural applications. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Original research describing hand-held ultrasound devices compared with high-end systems was included and assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2. The search was limited to articles published since 1 January 2012. A total of 2486 articles were found and screened by title and abstract. A total of 16 articles were chosen for final review. All of the included articles showed good overall agreement between hand-held and high-end ultrasound systems. Strong correlations were found when evaluating ascites, hydronephrosis, pleural cavities, in detection of abdominal aortic aneurysms and for use with obstetric and gynaecological patients. Other articles found good agreement for cholelithiasis and for determining the best site for paracentesis. QUADAS-2 analysis suggested few risks of bias and almost no concerns regarding applicability. For distinct clinical questions, hand-held devices may be a valuable supplement to physical examination. However, evidence is inadequate, and more research is needed on the abdominal and pleural use of hand-held ultrasound with more standardised comparisons, using only blinded reviewers.

Indexed as

abdomencomparisonhand-heldpleurapocket devicesportableultrasound

Identifiers

PMID31208078
PMCPMC6628329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.