Point‐of‐care ultrasound in the COVID‐19 era: A scoping review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, unprecedented pressure has been added to healthcare systems around the globe. Imaging is a crucial component in the management of COVID-19 patients. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) such as hand-carried ultrasound emerges in the COVID-19 era as a tool that can simplify the imaging process of COVID-19 patients, and potentially reduce the strain on healthcare providers and healthcare resources. The preliminary evidence available suggests an increasing role of POCUS in diagnosing, monitoring, and risk-stratifying COVID-19 patients. This scoping review aims to delineate the challenges in imaging COVID-19 patients, discuss the cardiopulmonary complications of COVID-19 and their respective sonographic findings, and summarize the current data and recommendations available. There is currently a critical gap in knowledge in the role of POCUS in the COVID-19 era. Nonetheless, it is crucial to summarize the current preliminary data available in order to help fill this gap in knowledge for future studies.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it