Trial reportBMC medical education2026
Augmedicine: Ultrasound: Training in ultrasound using XR - a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a diagnostic tool increasingly used. For novices, challenges such as probe orientation and hand-eye coordination make POCUS difficult to master. Extended reality (XR) can enhance POCUS training by projecting 3D anatomical models and offering real-time feedback on probe positioning. We developed the ‘Augmedicine: Ultrasound’ XR application, which enables heart POCUS training without the need for an instructor or test subject. The goal of this study was to determine whether XR-based training is non-inferior to standard POCUS training.
methodsMedical students in their internal medicine clerkship were randomized to XR-integrated POCUS training or standard training under direct instructor supervision. Competence was assessed through a practical test, where students obtained two ultrasound images and measured e-point septal separation (EPSS) and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE). Expert-determined values served as references and were used to determine non-inferiority. Secondary endpoints included test completion time and image quality.
resultsFifty-six students participated: 28 in the XR group and 28 in the standard training group. The mean difference in EPSS between groups was 0.3 mm (95% CI − 0.8 to 1.3 mm), and for TAPSE 0.5 mm (95% CI − 1.4 to 2.6 mm). In both cases, the confidence intervals remained within the predefined non-inferiority margins, indicating comparable performance between XR-based and standard training. There was no significant difference in the time taken to complete the test, and image quality was slightly higher in the XR group compared to the standard group.
conclusionXR-based POCUS training proved to be non-inferior to standard training in acquiring and measuring basic cardiac ultrasound images. Beyond comparable performance, the XR approach offers clear benefits in flexibility, scalability, and reduced reliance on instructors and test subjects—making it particularly valuable for training large cohorts and allowing learners to practice at any time and for any duration. These findings support the integration of XR as a practical and effective addition to ultrasound education.
trial registrationISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN13887304. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN13887304
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.