Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34760496›Full record

ArticleAustralasian journal of ultrasound in medicine2018

The clinical ultrasound report: Guideline for sonographers.

Martin Necas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Transient intussusception - What the sonographer needs to know.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The value of surveying the kidneys during pelvic ultrasound examinations.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2019
    Article
  16. How to set-up and perform contrast-enhanced ultrasound.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2019
    Article
  17. 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

1 author.

Martin NecasDepartment of Ultrasound Waikato Hospital Level 1 Waiora Building Pembroke Street Hamilton New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-8240-601X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The reporting roles of sonographers in Australasia vary considerably. A large number of sonographers already routinely produce formal reports, while others are moving into clinical ultrasound roles where reporting is expected. This article summarises the best practice in reporting of ultrasound examinations based on international literature and addresses key topics including report structure, clinical content, style and language. Numerous examples and sample phrases are provided and common pitfalls are discussed.

Indexed as

guidelinereportsonographerultrasound

Identifiers

PMID34760496
PMCPMC8409840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.