Intensive point‐of‐care ultrasound training with long‐term follow‐up in a cohort of Rwandan physicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We delivered a point-of-care ultrasound training programme in a resource-limited setting in Rwanda, and sought to determine participants' knowledge and skill retention. We also measured trainees' assessment of the usefulness of ultrasound in clinical practice. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of 17 Rwandan physicians participating in a point-of-care ultrasound training programme. The follow-up period was 1 year. Participants completed a 10-day ultrasound course, with follow-up training delivered over the subsequent 12 months. Trainee knowledge acquisition and skill retention were assessed via observed structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) administered at six points during the study, and an image-based assessment completed at three points. RESULTS: Trainees reported minimal structured ultrasound education and little confidence using point-of-care ultrasound before the training. Mean scores on the image-based assessment increased from 36.9% (95% CI 32-41.8%) before the initial 10-day training to 74.3% afterwards (95% CI 69.4-79.2; P < 0.001). The mean score on the initial OSCE after the introductory course was 81.7% (95% CI 78-85.4%). The mean OSCE performance at each subsequent evaluation was at least 75%, and the mean OSCE score at the 58-week follow up was 84.9% (95% CI 80.9-88.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians providing acute care in a resource-limited setting demonstrated sustained improvement in their ultrasound knowledge and skill 1 year after completing a clinical ultrasound training programme. They also reported improvements in their ability to provide patient care and in job satisfaction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".