Controversies surrounding AI-based reporting systems in echocardiography.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Radiologists' perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence in emergency radiology: A pilot survey.World journal of radiology · 2025
   Article
2. Artificial intelligence in echocardiography: current applications and future perspectives.Journal of echocardiography · 2025
   Review
3. AI ethics for the everyday intensivist.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
   Article
4. The Application of ChatGPT in Medicine: A Scoping Review and Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Revolution of echocardiographic reporting: the new era of artificial intelligence and natural language processing.2023

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as