Knowledge and Confidence Among Five Cohorts of Faculty Learners in a Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) Program: Factors Defining Learner Success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The availability of faculty proficient in point of care ultrasound (POCUS) has emerged as a barrier to the ongoing expansion of POCUS across the field of internal medicine. We sought to examine the faculty graduates of our institutional POCUS program to identify characteristics associated with long-term proficiency to inform curricula and guide institutional support. Methods: We emailed a test and survey to the 89 faculty graduates of the annual POCUS course we have run from 2018-2023. Results: Of the 46 participants (52%) who completed the test and survey, the overall median test score was 72%. Graduates were most confident with image acquisition of the lung, and were most likely to use ultrasound to evaluate ascites and dyspnea. All 11 participants reporting completion of an image portfolio were actively teaching POCUS, whereas only 54% of non-completers were teaching. Portfolio completers scored higher on the test compared to non-completers (median 92% and 68%, respectively, p <0.01) and were more confident in image acquisition and interpretation (p<0.001). Conclusions: In this long-term, single-institutional study of faculty graduates of an annual POCUS program, those who reported completing an image portfolio scored significantly higher on a knowledge test, reported higher confidence with image acquisition and interpretation, and reported using and teaching POCUS more frequently compared to graduates who did not complete the portfolio. POCUS education programs should be designed to foster continuous scanning practice and image portfolio completion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".