Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36639627›Full record

ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2023

Objective structured clinical examination in basic thoracic ultrasound: a European study of validity evidence.

Pia Iben Pietersen, Rahul Bhatnagar, Freja Andreasen, Lars Konge, Christian Borbjerg Laursen, Najib Rahman, Anders Bo Nielsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Pia Iben PietersenDepartment of Radiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. Pia.iben.pietersen3@rsyd.dk.
Rahul BhatnagarRespiratory Medicine Department, North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.
Freja AndreasenDepartment of Clinical Research, ODIN - Odense Respiratory Research Unit, University of Southern Denmark, Odense C, Denmark.
Lars KongeCAMES - Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christian Borbjerg LaursenDepartment of Clinical Research, ODIN - Odense Respiratory Research Unit, University of Southern Denmark, Odense C, Denmark.
Najib RahmanOxford Centre for Respiratory Medicine, Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Medicine Oxford Institute, Oxford, UK.
Anders Bo NielsenSimC - Simulation Centre, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Odense University Hospital · DKCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation · DKSouthmead Hospital · GBUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBasic thoracic ultrasound is being used more frequently by clinicians in several settings due to its high diagnostic accuracy for many common causes of respiratory failure and dyspnoea. However, ultrasound examinations are operator-dependent, and sufficient competences are needed to obtain high sensitivity and specificity of examinations. Additionally, it is crucial for ultrasound operators to perceive the competence to interpret the images and integrate them into the patient history and other examinations. This study aims to explore and gather validity evidence for an objective structured clinical examination test of basic thoracic ultrasound competences and establish a pass/fail score.

methodsAn expert panel created the test which included two theoretical and five practical stations representing cases with different diagnoses that cause respiratory symptoms and which are possible to establish by basic thoracic ultrasound. Twenty-five participants with different levels of experience in basic thoracic ultrasound completed the test. Data of the test scores were used for item analysis, and exploring validity evidence was done according to Messick's framework which is recommended. The contrasting groups' standard setting method was used to establish a pass/fail score.

resultsThe summarised internal consistency reliability was high with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.87. The novice group (n = 4) had a mean test score of 42 ± 10.1 points, the intermediate group (n = 8) scored 79.1 ± 8.1 points, and the experienced group (n = 13) 89.0 ± 6.2 points (one-way ANOVA, p < 0.001). A pass/fail score of 71 points was thus derived (maximum test score = 105 points).

conclusionWe developed a test for the assessment of clinical competences in basic thoracic ultrasound with solid validity evidence, and a pass/fail standard with no false positives or false negatives.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceHumansReproducibility of ResultsUltrasonographyMedical educationThoracic ultrasoundTrainingUltrasound diagnostics

Identifiers

PMID36639627
PMCPMC9837899
OpenAlexW4315864692

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.