ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
AI-Enhanced POCUS in Emergency Care.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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 Point-of-Care Ultrasound: Domains, Barriers and a Framework for Future Development.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2026Article
- Role of point-of-care ultrasonography in kidney disease management: A single solution for multiple challenges.World journal of nephrology · 2026Article
- Beyond Computer-Aided Diagnosis: Artificial Intelligence as a "Digital Mentor" for POCUS Image Acquisition and Quality Assurance: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Assistance Does Not Provide Immediate Benefit for Right Upper Quadrant Window Acquisition.Cureus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an essential component of emergency medicine, enabling rapid bedside assessment across a wide spectrum of acute conditions. Its effectiveness, however, remains constrained by operator dependency, variable image quality, and time-critical decision-making. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) offer opportunities to augment POCUS by supporting image acquisition, interpretation, and quantitative analysis. This narrative review synthesizes current evidence on AI-enhanced POCUS applications in emergency care, encompassing trauma, non-traumatic emergencies, integrated workflows, resource-limited settings, and education and training. Across trauma settings, AI-assisted POCUS has demonstrated promising performance for automated detection of pneumothorax, hemothorax, and free intraperitoneal fluid, supporting standardized eFAST examinations and rapid triage. In non-traumatic emergencies, AI-enabled cardiovascular, pulmonary, and abdominal applications provide automated measurements and pattern recognition that can approach expert-level performance when image quality is adequate. Integrated AI-POCUS systems and educational tools further highlight the potential to expand ultrasound access, support non-expert users, and standardize training. Nevertheless, important limitations persist, including limited generalizability, dataset bias, device heterogeneity, and uncertain impact on clinical decision-making and patient outcomes. In conclusion, AI-enhanced POCUS is transitioning from proof-of-concept toward early clinical integration in emergency medicine. While current evidence supports its role as a decision-support tool that may enhance consistency and efficiency, widespread adoption will require prospective multicentre validation, development of representative POCUS-specific datasets, vendor-agnostic solutions, and alignment with clinical, ethical, and regulatory frameworks.
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.