ArticleBMC medical education2026
Consensus on core POCUS applications for Korean emergency medicine training: a Delphi study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an essential diagnostic and procedural tool in emergency medicine, yet training content and evaluation remain inconsistent across Korean residency programs. To address this gap, the Society of Emergency and Critical Care Imaging (SECCI) sought to develop a consensus-based list of core POCUS applications tailored to the Korean clinical context.
methodsA three-round modified Delphi survey (2022–2023) was conducted with 71 Korean emergency and critical care physicians, all certified POCUS instructors with ≥ 3 years of teaching experience. An initial list of 109 applications across 15 categories was generated from international guidelines and pre-round expert meetings. In each round, panelists rated items on a 9-point Likert scale; consensus was defined as ≥ 80% of ratings in the highest (7–9) or lowest (1–3) tertiles. Items meeting consensus were removed after each round, while unresolved items proceeded to subsequent rounds. Open-ended feedback in Rounds 1 and 2 informed item revisions and additions. This study was not a clinical trial; a trial registration number is therefore not applicable.
resultsResponse rates were 73.2% (Round 1), 96.2% (Round 2), and 84.0% (Round 3). Across the three rounds, 59 applications achieved consensus: 27 in Round 1, 24 in Round 2, and 8 in Round 3. The final list encompassed resuscitative (e.g., E-FAST, pericardial tamponade, global ventricular function), diagnostic (e.g., biliary disease, femoral DVT, pulmonary edema), and procedural (e.g., vascular access, thoracentesis, pericardiocentesis) domains. Compared with international curricula, the Korean consensus emphasized advanced hemodynamic and cardiac function assessments, reflecting local priorities in resuscitation and shock management, while de-emphasizing certain diagnostic scans (e.g., obstetric, musculoskeletal) due to ready access to alternative imaging.
conclusionsThis nationwide Delphi process produced the first consensus-based core POCUS curriculum for emergency medicine residency training in Korea. The framework balances alignment with global best practices and responsiveness to local clinical workflows, providing a structured basis for standardization, competency assessment, and phased implementation across training programs.
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.