Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36614870›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Detectable Bias between Vascular Ultrasound Echo-Tracking Systems: Relevance Depends on Application.

Afrah E F Malik, Alessandro Giudici, Koen W F van der Laan, Jos Op 't Roodt, Werner H Mess, Tammo Delhaas, Bart Spronck, Koen D Reesink

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Afrah E F MalikDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4681-5304
Alessandro GiudiciDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8288-3980
Koen W F van der LaanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Jos Op 't RoodtDepartment of Internal Medicine, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Werner H MessDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Tammo DelhaasDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6897-9700
Bart SpronckDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1076-1922
Koen D ReesinkDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2354-883X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Esaote MyLab70 ultrasound system has been extensively used to evaluate arterial properties. Since it is reaching end-of-service-life, ongoing studies are forced to seek an alternative, with some opting for the Esaote MyLabOne. Biases might exist between the two systems, which, if uncorrected, could potentially lead to the misinterpretation of results. This study aims to evaluate a potential bias between the two devices. Moreover, by comparing two identical MyLabOne systems, this study also aims to investigate whether biases estimated between the MyLabOne and MyLab70 employed in this study could be generalized to any other pair of similar scanners. Using a phantom set-up, we performed n = 60 measurements to compare MyLab70 to MyLabOne and n = 40 measurements to compare the two MyLabOne systems. Comparisons were performed to measure diameter, wall thickness, and distension. Both comparisons led to significant biases for the diameter (relative bias: −0.27% and −0.30% for the inter- and intra-scanner model, respectively, p < 0.05) and wall thickness (relative bias: 0.38% and −1.23% for inter- and intra-scanner model, respectively p < 0.05), but not for distension (relative bias: 0.48% and −0.12% for inter- and intra-scanner model, respectively, p > 0.05). The biases estimated here cannot be generalized to any other pair of similar scanners. Therefore, longitudinal studies with large sample sizes switching between scanners should perform a preliminary comparison to evaluate potential biases between their devices. Furthermore, caution is warranted when using biases reported in similar comparative studies. Further work should evaluate the presence and relevance of similar biases in human data.

Indexed as

arterial propertiesarterial stiffnessecho-trackingvascular ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID36614870
PMCPMC9821692

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.