ReviewCureus2025
AI-Assisted Handheld Echocardiography by Nonexpert Operators: A Narrative Review of Prospective Studies.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- Artificial Intelligence in Cardiac Point-of-Care Ultrasound: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in breaking the learning curve for echocardiography: a secondary analysis of a multicentre trial.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Stroke-point-of-care ultrasound: a new holistic approach to bedside evaluation in stroke patients using ultrasound.European stroke journal · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Empowered "Walking Hospitals": A Narrative Review of Innovative Models and Ecosystem Construction in Rural Healthcare.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Handheld point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) increasingly incorporates AI to assist nonexpert operators in echocardiography, guiding image acquisition and automating core measurements. This narrative review synthesizes recent (2018-2025) prospective studies evaluating AI-assisted handheld echocardiography performed by nonexpert users in adult, pediatric, ambulatory, and critical care settings. A structured PubMed/MEDLINE search was used to identify eligible studies that included prospective clinical trials and randomized controlled trials that assessed real-time AI guidance, image quality feedback, automated view classification, and/or automated measurements (e.g., ejection fraction (EF) analysis). Across nine studies, AI guidance consistently improved image acquisition, enabling nonexperts to obtain diagnostically adequate transthoracic views in most patients after limited training. In hospital and outpatient settings, diagnostic adequacy for key triage questions such as left ventricular function and pericardial effusion frequently exceeded 90%. Automated EF analysis achieved close agreement with reference echocardiography, while end-to-end nurse-led pathways demonstrated feasible integration into routine clinic workflows with short examination times. Educational trials further showed higher view-acquisition success, faster learning, and improved recognition of systolic dysfunction with minimal time penalties. Overall, AI-assisted handheld echocardiography supports reliable, triage-oriented cardiac imaging by nonexperts across diverse environments. Strengths include enhanced feasibility, consistency, and efficiency, while Doppler-dependent tasks show lower adequacy and should not be frontline targets currently. Broader validation, outcome-based evaluation, and structured governance are needed to ensure safe, equitable, and scalable implementation.
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.