ArticleThe ultrasound journal2025
Clinical obstacles to machine-learning POCUS adoption and system-wide AI implementation (The COMPASS-AI survey).
Article in The ultrasound journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-based quality control was associated with improved fetal ultrasound image quality in low-resource settings: a real-world multicenter study from West China.BMC medicine · 2026Observational
- AI-Enhanced POCUS in Emergency Care.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Rapid bedside multimodal ultrasound screening for acute type A aortic dissection: a perspective.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence approaches to predicting treatment non-adherence in chronic diseases: a narrative review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Point of Care Ultrasound Curriculum in an Internal Medicine Residency Program: 9 Years of Experience From a Teaching Hospital in the United States.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has become indispensable in various medical specialties. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) holds significant promise to enhance POCUS capabilities further. However, a comprehensive understanding of healthcare professionals' perspectives on this integration is lacking.
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the global perceptions, familiarity, and adoption of AI in POCUS among healthcare professionals.
methodsAn international, web-based survey was conducted among healthcare professionals involved in POCUS. The survey instrument included sections on demographics, familiarity with AI, perceived utility, barriers (technological, training, trust, workflow, legal/ethical), and overall perceptions regarding AI-assisted POCUS. The data was analysed by descriptive statistics, frequency distributions, and group comparisons (using chi-square/Fisher's exact test and t-test/Mann-Whitney U test).
resultsThis study surveyed 1154 healthcare professionals on perceived barriers to implementing AI in point-of-care ultrasound. Despite general enthusiasm, with 81.1% of respondents expressing agreement or strong agreement, significant barriers were identified. The most frequently cited single greatest barriers were Training & Education (27.1%) and Clinical Validation & Evidence (17.5%). Analysis also revealed that perceptions of specific barriers vary significantly based on demographic factors, including region of practice, medical specialty, and years of healthcare experience.
conclusionThis novel global survey provides critical insights into the perceptions and adoption of AI in POCUS. Findings highlight considerable enthusiasm alongside crucial challenges, primarily concerning training, validation, guidelines, and support. Addressing these barriers is essential for the responsible and effective implementation of AI in POCUS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.