ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Artificial Intelligence (AI) versus POCUS Expert: A Validation Study of Three Automatic AI-Based, Real-Time, Hemodynamic Echocardiographic Assessment Tools.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.
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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-enhanced guidance demonstrated improvement in novices' Apical-4-chamber and Apical-5-chamber views.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Artificial Intelligence in Point-of-Care Ultrasound: Domains, Barriers and a Framework for Future Development.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2026Article
- Can FoCUS Speed Up the Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Emergency Department?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Cross-sectional evaluation of cardiovascular biological age using point-of-care ultrasound.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Innovation, Technology, and Telemedicine in Critical Care.Critical care clinics · 2026Review
- Development of a Deep Learning-Based Feedback Model to Assist Medical Students Learning Renal Ultrasound Acquisition: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Structural heart disease screening using artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram and novice handheld cardiac ultrasound: a cost analysis.European heart journal open · 2026Article
- AI-Enhanced POCUS in Emergency Care.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Trust of Artificial Intelligence-Augmented Point-of-Care Ultrasound Among Pediatric Emergency Physicians.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Article
- Contemporary applications of artificial intelligence and machine learning in echocardiography.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2025Review
- Ten Influential Point-of-Care Ultrasound Papers: 2023 in Review.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2025Review
- Continuing professional development for primary care physicians: a pre-post analysis of a focused abdominal point-of-care ultrasound pilot training.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Overcoming barriers in the use of artificial intelligence in point of care ultrasound.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Point-of-Care Ultrasonography in the Critical Care Unit: An Update.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Critical care ultrasound: development, evolution, current and evolving clinical concepts in critical care medicine.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Automatic B-lines: a tool for minimizing time to diuretic administration in pulmonary edema patients in the emergency department of a developing country.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Point-of-care ultrasound training in nephrology: a position statement by the International Alliance for POCUS in Nephrology.Clinical kidney journal · 2024Review
- Artificial intelligence-enhanced patient evaluation: bridging art and science.European heart journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint Of Care Ultra-Sound (POCUS) is an operator dependent modality. POCUS examinations usually include 'Eyeballing' the inspected anatomical structure without conducting accurate measurements due to complexity and insufficient time. Automatic real time measuring tools can make accurate measurements fast and simple and dramatically increase examination reliability while saving the operator much time and effort. In this study we aim to assess three automatic tools which are integrated into the Venue™ device by GE: the automatic ejection fraction, velocity time integral, and inferior vena cava tools in comparison to the gold standard-an examination by a POCUS expert.
methodsA separate study was conducted for each of the three automatic tools. In each study, cardiac views were acquired by a POCUS expert. Relevant measurements were taken by both an auto tool and a POCUS expert who was blinded to the auto tool's measurement. The agreement between the POCUS expert and the auto tool was measured for both the measurements and the image quality using a Cohen's Kappa test.
resultsAll three tools have shown good agreement with the POCUS expert for high quality views: auto LVEF (0.498;
conclusionsThe Venue™ show a high agreement with a POCUS expert for high quality views. This shows that auto tools can provide reliable real time assistance in performing accurate measurements, but do not reduce the need of a good image acquisition technique.
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.