Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32613261›Full record

ArticleThe ultrasound journal2020

Offshore telementored ultrasound: a quality assessment study.

Victoria Vatsvåg, Kjetil Todnem, Torvind Næsheim, John Cathcart, Daniel Kerr, Nils Petter Oveland

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The ultrasound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Live teleultrasound for evaluation of the chest: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Victoria VatsvågSchool Health Sciences, Ulster University, Co., Antrim, UK. victoria.vatsvag@uis.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7467-8346
Kjetil TodnemDepartment of Health and Working Environment, Global Business Support, Equinor ASA, Stavanger, Norway.
Torvind NæsheimCardiovascular Research Group, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT, The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
John CathcartSchool Health Sciences, Ulster University, Co., Antrim, UK.
Daniel KerrSchool Health Sciences, Ulster University, Co., Antrim, UK.
Nils Petter OvelandFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Quality and Health Technology, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
University of Ulster · GBEquinor (Norway) · NOStavanger University Hospital · NOUniversity Hospital of North Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelementored ultrasound (US) connects experts to novices through various types of communication and network technologies with the overall aim to bridge the medical imaging gap between patients' diagnostic needs and on-site user experience. The recurrent theme in previous research on remote telementored US is the limited access to US machines and experienced users. This study was conducted to determine whether telementored US was feasible in a remote offshore setting. The aim was to assess if an onshore US expert can guide an offshore nurse through focused US scanning protocols by connecting an US machine to existing videoconference units at the offshore hospitals and to evaluate the diagnostic quality of the images and cineloops procured.

resultsThe diagnostic quality of cineloops was scored on a five-point scale. The percentage of cineloops suitable for interpretation (score 3 ≥) for the FATE and e-FAST protocols was 96.4 and 79.1. Lung sliding and seashore sign could be identified in all volunteers. The scan time for the FAST protocol (n = four scanning positions), FATE protocol (n = six scanning positions) and both lungs (n = two scanning positions) was 1 min 20 s, 4 min 15 s and 32 s, respectively.

conclusionA novice US user can be guided by a remote expert through focused US protocols within an acceptable time frame and with good diagnostic quality using existing communication and network systems found onboard offshore oil rigs.

Indexed as

OffshorePoCUSRemoteTelementored ultrasoundUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID32613261
PMCPMC7329972
OpenAlexW3038614032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.