ArticleCureus2021
Teaching Seasoned Doctors New Technology: An Intervention to Reduce Barriers and Improve Comfort With Clinical Ultrasound.
Article in Cureus, 2021. 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.
- Impact of a Basic and Advanced Point-of-Care Ultrasound Training Program on Emergency Medicine Faculty Usage.Cureus · 2026Article
- Advancements in Ultrasound Gel Pad Technologies: Enhancing Diagnostic Precision, Procedural Efficiency, and Therapeutic Applications.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Emergency Medicine Faculty Utilization of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in the Clinical Setting.Cureus · 2025Article
- RUSH to the Diagnosis: Identifying Occult Pathology in Hypotensive Patients.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Success of implementation of a systemwide point-of-care ultrasound privileging program for emergency medicine faculty.AEM education and training · 2022Article
- Design and implementation of a basic and global point of care ultrasound (POCUS) certification curriculum for emergency medicine faculty.The ultrasound journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction Although clinical ultrasound (CUS) is a core skill that is a requirement for emergency medicine (EM) residency graduation, only a fraction of EM practitioners who trained prior to this requirement are certified in CUS. The objective of the study was to implement a CUS workshop for practicing EM physicians, identify barriers to utilization, and assess comfort with the machine, obtaining and interpreting images, and incorporating CUS into clinical practice. Methods This was a prospective descriptive cohort study of EM physician faculty who participated in an interactive 5-hour CUS workshop intervention that introduced four core CUS modalities via didactics and hands-on scanning stations. Pre- and post-surveys were administered to identify barriers to utilization and assess perceived comfort with CUS using a 5-point Likert scale. Results were analyzed using Fisher's exact and paired t-tests. Results Thirty-five EM physicians participated with a 100% survey response rate. Only five of the physicians were ultrasound certified at the time of the workshop. On average, physicians were 16 years post-residency. Prior to the workshop, 29% had minimal ultrasound experience and 43% had not performed more than 50 ultrasounds. In the pre-course survey, every physician expressed at least one barrier to CUS utilization. Post-workshop, physicians felt significantly more comfortable using the ultrasound machine (p=0.0008), obtaining and interpreting images (p=0.0009 and p=0.0004), and incorporating CUS into clinical practice (p=0.002). Conclusion This workshop is an effective tool to expose practicing physicians to core concepts of CUS, improve their comfort level, and reduce barriers to ultrasound utilization.
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.