Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36443355›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Novice-performed point-of-care ultrasound for home-based imaging.

Nicole M Duggan, Nick Jowkar, Irene W Y Ma, Sara Schulwolf, Lauren A Selame, Chanel E Fischetti, Tina Kapur, Andrew J Goldsmith

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicole M DugganDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, NH-2, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. nmduggan@partners.org.
Nick JowkarDepartment of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, USA.
Irene W Y MaDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Sara SchulwolfUniversity of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, USA.
Lauren A SelameDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, NH-2, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Chanel E FischettiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, NH-2, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Tina KapurDepartment of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, USA.
Andrew J GoldsmithDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, NH-2, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USUniversity of Calgary · CAUniversity of Connecticut · US

Funding

Continuous Compensation of Brain Shift during NeurosurgeryR01EB027134 · NIBIB · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI FRISKEN, SARAH · 2018 to 2021
$1.8M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB027134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient-performed point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) may be feasible for use in home-based healthcare. We investigated whether novice users can obtain lung ultrasound (LUS) images via self-scanning with similar interpretability and quality as experts. Adult participants with no prior medical or POCUS training, who were capable of viewing PowerPoint slides in their home and who could hold a probe to their chest were recruited. After training, volunteers self-performed 8-zone LUS and saved images using a hand-held POCUS device in their own home. Each 8-zone LUS scan was repeated by POCUS experts. Clips were independently viewed and scored by POCUS experts blinded to performing sonographers. Quality and interpretability scores of novice- and expert-obtained LUS images were compared. Thirty volunteers with average age of 42.8 years (Standard Deviation (SD) 15.8), and average body mass index of 23.7 (SD 3.1) were recruited. Quality of novice and expert scans did not differ (median score 2.6, interquartile range (IQR) 2.3-2.9 vs. 2.8, IQR 2.3-3.0, respectively p = 0.09). Individual zone quality also did not differ (P > 0.05). Interpretability of LUS was similar between expert and novice scanners (median 7 zones interpretable, IQR 6-8, for both groups, p = 0.42). Interpretability of novice-obtained scans did not differ from expert scans (median 7 out of 8 zones, IQR 6-8, p = 0.42). Novice-users can self-obtain interpretable, expert-quality LUS clips with minimal training. Patient-performed LUS may be feasible for outpatient home monitoring.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingPoint-of-Care SystemsAdultHumansPoint-of-Care TestingThoraxUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID36443355
PMCPMC9703400
OpenAlexW4310196521

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.