Observational studyPloS one2024
Evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction by a new automatic tool on a pocket ultrasound device: Concordance study with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04641169 (Evaluation of the Ejection Fraction of the Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction), which is not on this 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.
Evaluation of the Ejection Fraction of the Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction (LVEF) by a New Automatic Evaluation Tool in a Pocket Ultrasound Device: Study of Concordance With the Estimated by Cardiac Magnetic Reasoning Imaging (MRI)
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- AI-Assisted LVEF Assessment Using a Handheld Ultrasound Device: A Single-Center Comparative Study Against Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Journal of clinical 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAssessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is one of the primary objectives of echocardiography. The gold standard assessment technique in emergency medicine is eyeballing. A new tool is now available on pocket ultrasound devices (PUD): automatic LVEF. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the concordance between LVEF values estimated by automatic LVEF with PUD and by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS: This was a prospective, monocentric, and observational study. All adult patients with an indication for cardiac MRI underwent a point-of-care ultrasound. Blinded to the MRI results, the emergency physician assessed LVEF using the automatic PUD tool and by visual evaluation.
resultsSixty patients were included and analyzed. Visual estimation of LVEF was feasible for all patients and automatic evaluation for 52 (87%) patients. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient between automatic ejection fraction with PUD and by cardiac MRI was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.03-0.40).
conclusionConcordance between LVEF estimated by the automatic ejection fraction with PUD and LVEF estimated by MRI was non-existent.
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.