Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37393330›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2023

Clinical benefit of AI-assisted lung ultrasound in a resource-limited intensive care unit.

Phung Tran Huy Nhat, Nguyen Van Hao, Phan Vinh Tho, Hamideh Kerdegari, Luigi Pisani, Le Ngoc Minh Thu, Le Thanh Phuong, Ha Thi Hai Duong, Duong Bich Thuy, Angela McBride and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Advances in thoracic ultrasound.The European respiratory journal · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Advances in bedside imaging: lung ultrasound.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

19 authors.

Phung Tran Huy NhatOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. nhat.phung@kcl.ac.uk.
Nguyen Van HaoMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand.
Phan Vinh ThoHospital of Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Hamideh KerdegariSchool of Biomedical Engineering Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Luigi PisaniMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand.
Le Ngoc Minh ThuHospital of Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Le Thanh PhuongOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Ha Thi Hai DuongHospital of Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Duong Bich ThuyHospital of Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Angela McBrideOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Miguel XochicaleSchool of Biomedical Engineering Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Marcus J SchultzMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand.
Reza RazaviSchool of Biomedical Engineering Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Andrew P KingSchool of Biomedical Engineering Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Louise ThwaitesOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Nguyen Van Vinh ChauHospital of Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Sophie YacoubOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
VITAL Consortium
Alberto GomezSchool of Biomedical Engineering Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterpreting point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) images from intensive care unit (ICU) patients can be challenging, especially in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) where there is limited training available. Despite recent advances in the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to automate many ultrasound imaging analysis tasks, no AI-enabled LUS solutions have been proven to be clinically useful in ICUs, and specifically in LMICs. Therefore, we developed an AI solution that assists LUS practitioners and assessed its usefulness in  a low resource ICU.

methodsThis was a three-phase prospective study. In the first phase, the performance of four different clinical user groups in interpreting LUS clips was assessed. In the second phase, the performance of 57 non-expert clinicians with and without the aid of a bespoke AI tool for LUS interpretation was assessed in retrospective offline clips. In the third phase, we conducted a prospective study in the ICU where 14 clinicians were asked to carry out LUS examinations in 7 patients with and without our AI tool and we interviewed the clinicians regarding the usability of the AI tool.

resultsThe average accuracy of beginners' LUS interpretation was 68.7% [95% CI 66.8-70.7%] compared to 72.2% [95% CI 70.0-75.6%] in intermediate, and 73.4% [95% CI 62.2-87.8%] in advanced users. Experts had an average accuracy of 95.0% [95% CI 88.2-100.0%], which was significantly better than beginners, intermediate and advanced users (p < 0.001). When supported by our AI tool for interpreting retrospectively acquired clips, the non-expert clinicians improved their performance from an average of 68.9% [95% CI 65.6-73.9%] to 82.9% [95% CI 79.1-86.7%], (p < 0.001). In prospective real-time testing, non-expert clinicians improved their baseline performance from 68.1% [95% CI 57.9-78.2%] to 93.4% [95% CI 89.0-97.8%], (p < 0.001) when using our AI tool. The time-to-interpret clips improved from a median of 12.1 s (IQR 8.5-20.6) to 5.0 s (IQR 3.5-8.8), (p < 0.001) and clinicians' median confidence level improved from 3 out of 4 to 4 out of 4 when using our AI tool.

conclusionsAI-assisted LUS can help non-expert clinicians in an LMIC ICU improve their performance in interpreting LUS features more accurately, more quickly and more confidently.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceIntensive Care UnitsHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesUltrasonographyArtificial intelligenceDeep learningIntensive care unitLung ultrasoundReal-time

Identifiers

PMID37393330
PMCPMC10314555

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.