SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2010
Incidental findings in imaging diagnostic tests: a systematic review.
Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 158 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
158 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Incidental findings from panoramic radiographs: A systematic review with meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Pooled it
- Choosing wisely in neuroradiology: evaluating CT and MR utilization trends in Europe.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Prevalence and Significance of Incidental PET/CT Findings of Cancer Detected in Patients Evaluated for Their Primary Hematologic Malignancy: A Systematic Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Pooled it
- Audit and feedback to change diagnostic image ordering practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Cystic duct cyst in adults: a systematic review of the sixth entity.Surgery today · 2023Pooled it
- Nature and clinical significance of incidental findings in maxillofacial cone-beam computed tomography: a systematic review.Oral radiology · 2021Pooled it
- Prevalence and outcomes of incidental imaging findings: umbrella review.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- To tell or not to tell? A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2013Pooled it
- Impact of disclosure of radiographic test results on quality of life among patients with hernias: a randomized controlled trial.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Trial
- Nicotine dependence as an independent risk factor for atherosclerosis in the National Lung Screening Trial.BMC public health · 2019Trial
- A Randomized Study of Patient Risk Perception for Incidental Renal Findings on Diagnostic Imaging Tests.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2018Trial
- High rates of clinically relevant incidental findings by total-body CT scanning in trauma patients; results of the REACT-2 trial.European radiology · 2017Trial
- Communication of incidental findings in the ED: Patient perspectives.Patient education and counseling · 2026Article
- CT sinus imaging utilization in Norway: trends over time and variation by region, age, and sex.Research in health services & regions · 2026Article
- A Simulation-Based Diagnostic Stewardship Framework for Imaging Utilization in Primary Care: A Model Using 100 Common Clinical Conditions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Automated identification of incidentalomas requiring follow-up: A multi-anatomy evaluation of LLM-based and supervised approaches.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2026Article
- Neoplastic Incidentalomas in the Emergency Department: Incidence, Imaging Type, Location, and Clinical Relevance.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Compositional and interpretable representation of histology using AI foundation models and sparse autoencoders.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Radiological detection rate and clinical impact of thoracoabdominal computed tomography in suspected infection in the emergency department: a retrospective cohort study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
98 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this review is to summarise the available evidence on the frequency and management of incidental findings in imaging diagnostic tests. Original articles were identified by a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library Plus databases using appropriate medical headings. Extracted variables were study design; sample size; type of imaging test; initial diagnosis; frequency and location of incidental findings; whether clinical follow-up was performed; and whether a definitive diagnosis was made. Study characteristics were assessed by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Any disagreement was solved by consensus. The relationship between the frequency of incidental findings and the study characteristics was assessed using a one-way ANOVA test, as was the frequency of follow-up of incidental findings and the frequency of confirmation. 251 potentially relevant abstracts were identified and 44 articles were finally included in the review. Overall, the mean frequency of incidental findings was 23.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.8-31.3%). The frequency of incidental findings was higher in studies involving CT technology (mean 31.1%, 95% CI 20.1-41.9%), in patients with an unspecific initial diagnosis (mean 30.5, 95% CI 0-81.6) and when the location of the incidental findings was unspecified (mean 33.9%, 95% CI 18.1-49.7). The mean frequency of clinical follow-up was 64.5% (95% CI 52.9-76.1%) and mean frequency of clinical confirmation was 45.6% (95% CI 32.1-59.2%). Although the optimal strategy for the management of these abnormalities is still unclear, it is essential to be aware of the low clinical confirmation in findings of moderate and major importance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.