From: Unravelling the skillset of point-of-care ultrasound: a systematic review
Relevant measurement | Is the correlation linear? | Reported R2 | Calculated R2 |
---|---|---|---|
Knowledge | |||
Baker et al. [31] | Yes | – | R2 = 0.053 |
Bell et al. [32] | Yes | – | R2 = 0.194 *** |
Berman et al. [50] | Yes | – | R2 = 0.119 * |
Carrigan et al. [44] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Chung et al. [35] | Yes | – | R2 = 0.116 * |
Janjigian et al. [36] | Yes | – | R2 = 0.608 at one-year,****R2 = 0.281 on post-two-day assessment* |
Kissin et al. [37] | Yes | – | First group: R2 = 0.49****, second group: R2 = 0.348 * |
Nielsen et al. [38] | No, spearman's rho is nonlinear correlation | – | R2 = 0.608 for residents**** |
Schott et al. [39] | Yes | R2 = 0.60**** | |
Shafqat et al. [47] | No, spearman's rho is nonlinear correlation | NRT-20: R2 = 0.0025 AH4: R2 = 0.0081 | |
Sisley et al. [42] | Yes | – | Precourse: R2 = 0.04, postcourse R2 = 0.02 |
Stolz et al. [41] | Yes | R2 = 0.028 | – |
Tolsgaard et al. [57] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Werner et al. [40] | No, spearman's rho is nonlinear correlation | – | R2 = 0.152* |
Woodworth et al. [43] | Yes | – | Pretest: R2 = 0.221, posttest: R2 = 0.410 |
Psychomotor ability | |||
Chapman et al. [45] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Dromey et al. [58] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Smith et al. [48] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Walker et al. [49] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Visuospatial ability | |||
Berman et al. [34] | Yes | – | Flexibility of closure: R2 = 0.040 Spatial orientation: R2 = 0.001, Visualization: R2 = 0.006 |
Carrigan et al. [44] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Chapman et al. [45] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Chuan et al. [52] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Clem et al. [46] | Yes | R2 = 0.36** | – |
Clem et al. [46] | Yes | After 30 h: R2 = 0.21*, after two semesters R2 = 0.23* | – |
Duce et al. [53] | No, spearman's rho is a linear correlation | – | Matrix reasoning: R2 = 0.144*, MRT-A: R2 = 0.130* |
Frederiksen et al. [54] | Yes | – | MRT + global image rating: R2 = 0.476***, MRT + global image evaluation: R2 = 0.194*, MRT + probe orientation: R2 = 0.314*** |
Hewson et al. [55] | No correlation reported | – | – |
Miller et al. [56] | Yes | – | MRT + posttest knowledge scores: R2 = 0.044****, MRT + PLAX score: R2 = − 0.16, MRT + PLAX time: R2 = − 0.04, MRT + hepatorenal score: R2 = − 0.12, MRT + hepatorenal time: R2 = − 0.16 |
Shafqat et al. [38] | No, Spearman’s rho is a nonlinear correlation | – | MRT score R2 = 0.221***, Group Embedded Figures Test: R2 = 0.004 |
Smith et al. [48] | No, Spearman’s rho is a nonlinear correlation | – | Block design test + global ultrasound performance: R2 = 0.221*** |