Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40615993›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025

AI-enabled obstetric point-of-care ultrasound as an emerging technology in low- and middle-income countries: provider and health system perspectives.

Sara Della Ripa, Nicole Santos, Dilys Walker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Emerging applications of artificial intelligence for obstetric ultrasound: A scoping review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Augmenting care, not replacing it: Generative artificial intelligence and equitable primary care in Southern Africa.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Sara Della Ripa *Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Nicole Santos *Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Dilys WalkerInstitute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. Dilys.Walker@ucsf.edu.

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation INV00325081
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), widespread access to obstetric ultrasound is challenged by lack of trained providers, workload, and inadequate resources required for sustainability. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a powerful tool for automating image acquisition and interpretation and may help overcome these barriers. This study explored stakeholders' opinions about how AI-enabled point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) might change current antenatal care (ANC) services in LMICs and identified key considerations for introduction.

methodsWe purposely sampled midwives, doctors, researchers, and implementors for this mixed methods study, with a focus on those who live or work in African LMICs. Individuals completed an anonymous web-based survey, then participated in an interview or focus group. Among the 41 participants, we captured demographics, experience with and perceptions of standard POCUS, and reactions to an AI-enabled POCUS prototype description. Qualitative data were analyzed by thematic content analysis and quantitative Likert and rank-order data were aggregated as frequencies; the latter was presented alongside illustrative quotes to highlight overall versus nuanced perceptions.

resultsThe following themes emerged: (1) priority AI capabilities; (2) potential impact on ANC quality, services and clinical outcomes; (3) health system integration considerations; and (4) research priorities. First, AI-enabled POCUS elicited concerns around algorithmic accuracy and compromised clinical acumen due to over-reliance on AI, but an interest in gestational age automation. Second, there was overall agreement that both standard and AI-enabled POCUS could improve ANC attendance (75%, 65%, respectively), provider-client trust (82%, 60%), and providers' confidence in clinical decision-making (85%, 70%). AI consistently elicited more uncertainty among respondents. Third, health system considerations emerged including task sharing with midwives, ultrasound training delivery and curricular content, and policy-related issues such as data security and liability risks. For both standard and AI-enabled POCUS, clinical decision support and referral strengthening were deemed necessary to improve outcomes. Lastly, ranked priority research areas included algorithm accuracy across diverse populations and impact on ANC performance indicators; mortality indicators were less prioritized.

conclusionOptimism that AI-enabled POCUS can increase access in settings with limited personnel and resources is coupled with expressions of caution and potential risks that warrant careful consideration and exploration.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAttitude of Health PersonnelPoint-of-Care SystemsPrenatal CareUltrasonography, PrenatalAdultDeveloping CountriesFemaleFocus GroupsHealth PersonnelHumansMidwiferyPregnancyQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesAfricaAntenatal careArtificial intelligenceObstetricsPOCUSPregnancyUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID40615993
PMCPMC12229288

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.