Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39962506›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Impact and reception of point-of-care ultrasound training across medical education levels.

Hendrik Leif Meyer, Jonas Einloft, Simon Bedenbender, Philipp Russ, Nadine Schlicker, Andre Ganser, Martin Christian Hirsch, Christian Görg, Ivica Grgic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors.

Hendrik Leif Meyer *Department of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Jonas Einloft *Department of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Simon BedenbenderDepartment of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Philipp RussDepartment of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Nadine SchlickerInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Andre GanserDepartment of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Martin Christian HirschInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Christian GörgInterdisciplinary Center of Ultrasound Diagnostics, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Ivica GrgicDepartment of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany. grgic@uni-marburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a versatile and cost-effective technology that can significantly enhance medical education and clinical practice. This study examines the acceptance of POCUS among medical students and explores strategies to optimize its integration into their training. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 318 medical students, spanning both preclinical and clinical semesters, participated in seminars that included POCUS demonstrations and hands-on practice. Their perceptions were assessed through a voluntary questionnaire based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which furthermore explored the ideal timing and potentially suitable subjects for integrating POCUS into the curriculum, with an emphasis on its role in developing clinical skills and supporting decision-making.

resultsAmong preclinical students, 60.7% had no prior ultrasound exposure, while 97% of clinical students reported some experience, albeit often limited. Despite the majority of senior students having some ultrasound experience, many lacked confidence in its use. Confidence in sonography skills was generally low across both groups, with 95.9% of preclinical and 79.4% of clinical students expressing a lack of confidence. Importantly, both preclinical and clinical students recognized the high usefulness of POCUS skills and rated the technology as user-friendly, with clinical students perceiving it as slightly easier to use. When asked to identify the most suitable subjects for POCUS training, students most frequently cited anatomy (35.2%) and internal medicine (16.7%). Additionally, a majority of students (57.7%) advocated for POCUS education to begin as early as the first semester.

conclusionThis study highlights a significant gap in ultrasound training among medical students, while also underscoring their strong motivation to learn and their positive perception of POCUS as a valuable tool for enhancing clinical skills and decision-making. The findings emphasize that early integration of sonography into the medical curriculum is both highly desired by students and essential for advancing medical education. This is particularly timely and important given the growing role of artificial intelligence in ultrasound technology and the opportunities expected to emerge from this integration.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceEducation, MedicalEducation, Medical, UndergraduatePoint-of-Care SystemsStudents, MedicalAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelCurriculumFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesUltrasonographyYoung AdultArtificial intelligence integrationClinical skills & decision supportMedical educationPoint-of-care diagnosticsUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID39962506
PMCPMC11834199

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.