Jingjing Wang, Wenjia Lei, Yantong Zhu, Na Zhang, Shijing Song, Li Wang, Qingqing Wu
{"title":"妊娠11 ~ 14周超声质量控制:来自中国早期妊娠超声队列的结果。","authors":"Jingjing Wang, Wenjia Lei, Yantong Zhu, Na Zhang, Shijing Song, Li Wang, Qingqing Wu","doi":"10.1186/s40001-025-03156-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the quality control (QC) of ultrasound scanning at 11-14 weeks of gestation during the first stage in the China Early Pregnancy Ultrasound Cohort (CEPUC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A stratified random sampling strategy was employed for QC on ultrasound images from 525 single fetuses between 11 and 13 <sup>+6</sup> weeks of gestation across nine hospitals. The QC process consisted of two elements: (1) the retention of 17 types of ultrasound scans and (2) the assessment of each scan's content, which was scored out of 47 points. QC was performed twice: initially through hospital self-assessment (self-QC) and a subsequent review by the cohort team (second QC). The QC scores were calculated and compared across different groups using the Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, or the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median number of retained ultrasound scans per person was 16.0 (interquartile range: 15.0-17.0). The median scores for self-QC and second QC were 44 points (interquartile range: 40-47) and 43 points (interquartile range: 38-46), respectively. The second QC scores were significantly lower than the self-QC scores (P < 0.001), with 225 cases (42.9%) scoring lower and 280 cases (53.3%) scoring equally. Excluding image magnification, the three items with the lowest scoring rates among the other 37 were: (1) coronal view of the cervical spine to the sacrum (62.3%), (2) assessing regurgitation in the tricuspid valve spectrum of the heart (63.4%), and (3) obtaining a three-dimensional (3D) image of the choroid plexus Sect. (78.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>QC in ultrasound is crucial for multicenter cohort studies, ensuring consistency and reliability across various sites. Both subjective and objective measurements should be seriously considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":11949,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Medical Research","volume":"30 1","pages":"891"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12482272/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality control of ultrasound at 11 to 14 weeks of gestation: results from the China Early Pregnancy Ultrasound Cohort.\",\"authors\":\"Jingjing Wang, Wenjia Lei, Yantong Zhu, Na Zhang, Shijing Song, Li Wang, Qingqing Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40001-025-03156-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the quality control (QC) of ultrasound scanning at 11-14 weeks of gestation during the first stage in the China Early Pregnancy Ultrasound Cohort (CEPUC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A stratified random sampling strategy was employed for QC on ultrasound images from 525 single fetuses between 11 and 13 <sup>+6</sup> weeks of gestation across nine hospitals. The QC process consisted of two elements: (1) the retention of 17 types of ultrasound scans and (2) the assessment of each scan's content, which was scored out of 47 points. QC was performed twice: initially through hospital self-assessment (self-QC) and a subsequent review by the cohort team (second QC). The QC scores were calculated and compared across different groups using the Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, or the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median number of retained ultrasound scans per person was 16.0 (interquartile range: 15.0-17.0). The median scores for self-QC and second QC were 44 points (interquartile range: 40-47) and 43 points (interquartile range: 38-46), respectively. The second QC scores were significantly lower than the self-QC scores (P < 0.001), with 225 cases (42.9%) scoring lower and 280 cases (53.3%) scoring equally. Excluding image magnification, the three items with the lowest scoring rates among the other 37 were: (1) coronal view of the cervical spine to the sacrum (62.3%), (2) assessing regurgitation in the tricuspid valve spectrum of the heart (63.4%), and (3) obtaining a three-dimensional (3D) image of the choroid plexus Sect. (78.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>QC in ultrasound is crucial for multicenter cohort studies, ensuring consistency and reliability across various sites. Both subjective and objective measurements should be seriously considered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11949,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Medical Research\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"891\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12482272/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Medical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-025-03156-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-025-03156-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quality control of ultrasound at 11 to 14 weeks of gestation: results from the China Early Pregnancy Ultrasound Cohort.
Objective: To assess the quality control (QC) of ultrasound scanning at 11-14 weeks of gestation during the first stage in the China Early Pregnancy Ultrasound Cohort (CEPUC).
Methods: A stratified random sampling strategy was employed for QC on ultrasound images from 525 single fetuses between 11 and 13 +6 weeks of gestation across nine hospitals. The QC process consisted of two elements: (1) the retention of 17 types of ultrasound scans and (2) the assessment of each scan's content, which was scored out of 47 points. QC was performed twice: initially through hospital self-assessment (self-QC) and a subsequent review by the cohort team (second QC). The QC scores were calculated and compared across different groups using the Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, or the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
Results: The median number of retained ultrasound scans per person was 16.0 (interquartile range: 15.0-17.0). The median scores for self-QC and second QC were 44 points (interquartile range: 40-47) and 43 points (interquartile range: 38-46), respectively. The second QC scores were significantly lower than the self-QC scores (P < 0.001), with 225 cases (42.9%) scoring lower and 280 cases (53.3%) scoring equally. Excluding image magnification, the three items with the lowest scoring rates among the other 37 were: (1) coronal view of the cervical spine to the sacrum (62.3%), (2) assessing regurgitation in the tricuspid valve spectrum of the heart (63.4%), and (3) obtaining a three-dimensional (3D) image of the choroid plexus Sect. (78.1%).
Conclusions: QC in ultrasound is crucial for multicenter cohort studies, ensuring consistency and reliability across various sites. Both subjective and objective measurements should be seriously considered.
期刊介绍:
European Journal of Medical Research publishes translational and clinical research of international interest across all medical disciplines, enabling clinicians and other researchers to learn about developments and innovations within these disciplines and across the boundaries between disciplines. The journal publishes high quality research and reviews and aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted research are published, regardless of their outcome.