ArticleJournal of the American College of Radiology : JACR2014
Hospital-level factors associated with use of pediatric radiation dose-reduction protocols for head CT: results from a national survey.
Article in Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Data mining in pediatric radiology in the era of artificial intelligence.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Impact of a statewide computed tomography scan educational campaign on radiation dose and repeat CT scan rates for transferred injured children.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Estimating the impact of deploying an electronic clinical decision support tool as part of a national practice improvement project.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Article
- The Think A-Head campaign: an introduction to ImageGently 2.0.Pediatric radiology · 2016Article
- Management of the Pediatric Neurocritical Care Patient.Seminars in neurology · 2016Review
- Reducing the Cranial CT Rate for Pediatric Minor Head Trauma at Three Community Hospitals.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo examine hospital-level factors associated with the use of a dedicated pediatric dose-reduction protocol and protective shielding for head CT in a national sample of hospitals.
methodsA mixed-mode (online and paper) survey was administered to a stratified random sample of US community hospitals (N = 751). Respondents provided information on pediatric head CT scanning practices, including use of a dose-reduction protocol. Modified Poisson regression analyses describe the relative risk (RR) of not reporting the use of a pediatric dose-reduction protocol or protective shielding; multivariable analyses adjust for census region, trauma level, children's hospital status, and bed size.
resultsOf hospitals that were contacted, 38 were ineligible (no CT scanner, hospital closed, do not scan infants), 1 refused, and 253 responded (35.5% response rate). Across all hospitals, 92.6% reported using a pediatric dose-reduction protocol. Modified Poisson regression showed that small hospitals (0-50 beds) were 20% less likely to report using a protocol than large hospitals (>150 beds) (RR: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.99; adjusted for covariates). Teaching hospitals were more likely to report using a protocol (RR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.02-1.19; adjusted for covariates). After adjusting for covariates, children's hospitals were significantly less likely to report using protective shielding than nonchildren's hospitals (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56-0.73), though this may be due to more advanced scanner type.
conclusionResults from this study provide guidance for tailored educational campaigns and quality improvement interventions to increase the adoption of pediatric dose-reduction efforts.
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.