We read with interest the excellent study by Arbelot et al., evaluating the learning curve for focused, diagnostic lung ultrasound. The authors should be commended for their heroic effort to conduct a multicenter educational study at 10 intensive care units spanning three continents to address an important question that will inform future training guidelines. But although the study’s results are broadly consistent with those of other related publications on this topic,2,3  we take issue with one aspect of the study’s methodology: the authors’ unique classification of lung ultrasound pathology. Specifically, the authors asked learners to assign each lung ultrasound exam a score on a five-point scale “according to the worst parenchymal pattern” visible in the exam. The scores ranged from 1 for “normal aeration” to 5 for “lung consolidation.” Although the authors’...

You do not currently have access to this content.