ArticlePloS one2023
Organ-specific learning curves of sonographers performing first-trimester anatomical screening and impact of score-based evaluation on ultrasound image quality.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical audit for first-trimester ultrasound screening: a single center experience.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFirst-trimester anatomical screening (FTAS) by ultrasound has been introduced in many countries as screening for aneuploidies, but also as early screening for fetal structural abnormalities. While a lot of emphasis has been put on the detection rates of FTAS, little is known about the performance of quality control programs and the sonographers' learning curve for FTAS. The aims of the study were to evaluate the performance of a score-based quality control system for the FTAS and to assess the learning curves of sonographers by evaluating the images of the anatomical planes that were part of the FTAS protocol.
methodsBetween 2012-2015, pregnant women opting for the combined test in the North-Netherlands were also invited to participate in a prospective cohort study extending the ultrasound investigation to include a first-trimester ultrasound performed according to a protocol. All anatomical planes included in the protocol were documented by pictures stored for each examination in logbooks. The logbooks of six sonographers were independently assessed by two fetal medicine experts. For each sonographer, logbooks of examination 25-50-75 and 100 plus four additional randomly selected logbooks were scored for correct visualization of 12 organ-system planes. A plane specific score of at least 70% was considered sufficient. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), was used to measure inter-assessor agreement for the cut-off scores. Organ-specific learning curves were defined by single-cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.
resultsSixty-four logbooks were assessed. Mean duration of the scan was 22 ± 6 minutes and mean gestational age was 12+6 weeks. In total 57% of the logbooks graded as sufficient. Most sufficient scores were obtained for the fetal skull (88%) and brain (70%), while the lowest scores were for the face (29%) and spine (38%). Five sonographers showed a learning curve for the skull and the stomach, four for the brain and limbs, three for the bladder and kidneys, two for the diaphragm and abdominal wall and one for the heart and spine and none for the face and neck.
conclusionLearning curves for FTAS differ per organ system and per sonographer. Although score-based evaluation can validly assess image quality, more dynamic approaches may better reflect clinical performance.
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.