Trial reportBMC medical education2025
Prospective comparison of static versus dynamic images in abdominal ultrasound education - a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report 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 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Detection of protein-losing enteropathy (PLE) ultrasonographic imaging features in dogs using deep learning neural networks.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn medical ultrasound education, static and dynamic images help learners to understand sonoanatomical and sonopathological findings. However, there is currently no clear evidence or recommendations from professional associations regarding which presentation format is more effective for developing ultrasound competencies. This prospective, randomised, controlled study aimed to investigate the impact of static versus dynamic ultrasound images on learners' acquisition of theoretical competencies in abdominal sonography.
methodsParticipants in certified ultrasound courses were randomised into two groups following an introductory session on ultrasound basics. Separately, both groups completed training covering normal findings and pathologies of the gallbladder, the liver and the pancreas. The study group underwent a digital training session (18 min total) for each of the three topics using dynamic images (video clips) while the control group received the same training session using static images. After the training, participants of both groups completed an online multiple-choice theory test, consisting of 54 questions with 4 answer options per question.
resultsA total of 145 datasets (69 control group, 76 study group) were included in the analysis. The study group achieved significantly higher overall theory test scores (p = 0.001) and performed significantly better in the total score of pathology findings (p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the total score of normal findings (p = 0.08). Multivariate regression analysis identified "group allocation dynamic," "experience with > 30 ultrasound examinations," and "employment in internal medicine" as significant positive predictors (p < 0.01) of theory test performance.
conclusionDynamic images in ultrasound education improve comprehension of pathological findings over static images. These insights should inform the development and adaptation of future training programs and educational materials to enhance the quality of ultrasound education and diagnostic accuracy.
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.