ArticleArchives of trauma research2014
Comparing the interpretation of traumatic chest x-ray by emergency medicine specialists and radiologists.
Article in Archives of trauma research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Radiograph Interpretation Discrepancies in a Community Hospital Emergency Department.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Can a Trained Radiology Technician Do Arterial Obstruction Quantification in Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism?Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2019Article
- Epidemiological Features of Injured Patients Examined by Tehran Emergency Medical Service Technicians.Advanced journal of emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Good Interdepartmental Relationships: The Foundations of a Solid Emergency Department.Advanced journal of emergency medicine · 2018Article
- Comparing the Quality and Complications of Tube Thoracostomy by Emergency Medicine and Surgery Residents; a Cohort Study.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2017Article
- The Accuracy of Plain Radiography in Detection of Traumatic Intrathoracic Injuries.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2016Article
- Diagnostic Value of Clinical Findings in Evaluation of Thoracolumbar Blunt Traumas.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2016Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Radiography in Initial Evaluation of Chest Trauma Patients.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2016Article
- Comparison of the Analgesic Effect of Intravenous Acetaminophen and Morphine Sulfate in Rib Fracture; a Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2015Article
- Validation of thoracic injury rule out criteria as a decision instrument for screening of chest radiography in blunt thoracic trauma.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and traumaArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiscrepancy between X-ray readings of emergency physicians (EPs) versus radiologists was reported between 0.95% and 16.8% in different studies. The discordance was even higher when specific studies such as chest X-rays (CXR) were probed.
objectivesThis prospective study was conducted to assess the discrepancies between emergency and radiology departments with respect to interpretation of the traumatic chest X-rays. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis prospective study was conducted in Shohadaye Tajrish Hospital, Tehran, Iran, from March to April 2014. Based on Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) guidelines, plain chest radiography (CXR) was ordered for all patients in two standard views of posterior-anterior and lateral. All CXRs were interpreted by a corresponding emergency medicine specialist and a radiologist blind to the clinical findings of the patients. Finally, the results of two interpretations were compared. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of traumatic CXR interpretation were calculated by EPs with 95% of confidence interval (CI).
resultsThe evaluation of EPs was identical to that of the radiologists in 89.5% of the cases. Ninety-eight percent (98%) indicated total agreement and 1.5 percent total disagreement.
conclusionsThere is a high agreement between EPs and radiologists in CXR interpretations in Shohadaye Tajrish Hospital. Thus, EPs can substitute radiologists in the emergency department. More improvements are recommended to achieve the standard level of agreement.
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.