ArticleThe ultrasound journal2026
Point-of-care ultrasound training using near-peer training and remote Supervision: A pilot randomized controlled trial.
Article in The ultrasound journal, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveTraditional point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) teaching that relies on hands-on practice faces challenges of limited scale and infection-control constraints during pandemics. We designed a low-contact curriculum integrating near-peer teaching (NPT) with faculty remote supervision (RS) and evaluated its effectiveness versus on-site faculty-led teaching.
methodsIn this randomized controlled pilot trial, 69 senior medical students were assigned to NPT+RS (n=34) or faculty-led control group (n=35). Both groups received identical didactic and hands-on training, with the NPT+RS group incorporating multi-camara telemedicine supervision by the faculty to support NPT. The primary outcome was the Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA)-based Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) score with four major domains measured 1 month after training. The secondary outcomes included the technology acceptance model (TAM) survey and the OSCE feedback.
resultsTotal OSCE scores (74.9 vs 76.8; p=0.614) and the Indication-Acquisition-Interpretation-Medical decision domain scores did not differ between two groups. For single items, only a lower interpretation performance at the posterolateral alveolar/pleural syndrome in NPT+RS group (4.6 vs 6.5; p=0.013) was found. The NPT+RS group reported higher perceived usefulness (efficiency, usefulness, performance, productivity; all p<0.05), with no between-group difference in perceived ease-of-use. The OSCE was more often perceived by the NPT+RS group as revealing weaknesses (p=0.002) and meriting routine post-training implementation (p=0.034).
conclusionsA low-contact PoCUS curriculum integrating NPT with RS achieved overall EPA-based OSCE performance comparable to traditional faculty-led instruction while enhancing perceived usefulness and assessment acceptance. Implementation of this model allows for greater training capacity and decreased contact. The capacity of NPT for image-interpretation skills warrants investigation.
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.