ArticleCritical care (London, England)2023
Clinical benefit of AI-assisted lung ultrasound in a resource-limited intensive care unit.
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.
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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for lung ultrasound interpretation: a systematic review.Frontiers in radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Recent advances in artificial intelligence across interventional pulmonology: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Role of artificial intelligence and point of care ultrasound in management of critically ill patients.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Peripheral muscle ultrasound in the ICU: current evidence, limitations, and future directions.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Serial bedside echocardiography identifies children at risk of recurrent Dengue shock: a prospective cohort study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Advances in thoracic ultrasound.The European respiratory journal · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in medicine: a position paper by the Italian Society of Internal Medicine.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Bedside thoracic echography in ICU: new insights for acute circulatory and respiratory failure.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Optimizing transducer choice for the detection of alveolar-interstitial syndrome in dogs and cats: an evidence-based review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Advances in bedside imaging: lung ultrasound.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025Review
- AI Enhances Lung Ultrasound Interpretation Across Clinicians with Varying Expertise Levels.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinical obstacles to machine-learning POCUS adoption and system-wide AI implementation (The COMPASS-AI survey).The ultrasound journal · 2025Article
- ESICM-ESPNIC international expert consensus on quantitative lung ultrasound in intensive care.Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
- Lung Ultrasound After COVID-19: A Pivotal Moment for Clinical Integration-Navigating Challenges and Seizing Opportunities.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Lung ultrasound for the diagnosis of pulmonary consolidation in children with community-acquired pneumonia.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for diagnostics in radiology practice: a rapid systematic scoping review.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Overcoming barriers in the use of artificial intelligence in point of care ultrasound.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Progress in the Application of Artificial Intelligence in Ultrasound-Assisted Medical Diagnosis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Guided Lung Ultrasound by Nonexperts.JAMA cardiology · 2025Article
- Sonographic machine-assisted recognition and tracking of B-lines in dogs: the SMARTDOG study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.