Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25900766›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine

Effect of screening abdominal ultrasound examination on the decision to pursue advanced diagnostic tests and treatment in dogs with neurologic disease.

N M Tong, A L Zwingenberger, W H Blair, S L Taylor, R X Chen, B K Sturges

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 94% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

N M TongWilliam R. Pritchard Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital, University of California School of Veterinary Medicine, Davis, CA.
A L ZwingenbergerDepartment of Surgical and Radiological Sciences, University of California School of Veterinary Medicine, Davis, CA.
W H BlairWilliam R. Pritchard Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital, University of California School of Veterinary Medicine, Davis, CA.
S L TaylorClinical and Translational Science Center, School of Medicine, University of California, Sacramento, CA.
R X ChenClinical and Translational Science Center, School of Medicine, University of California, Sacramento, CA.
B K SturgesDepartment of Surgical and Radiological Sciences, University of California School of Veterinary Medicine, Davis, CA.
Southern California Clinical and Translational Science Institute · USUniversity of California, Davis · USVeterinary Medical Teaching Hospital · US

Funding

UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR000002 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI BERGLUND, LARS F · 2012 to 2015
$12.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAbdominal ultrasound examinations (AUS) are commonly performed before advanced neurodiagnostics to screen for diseases that might affect diagnostic plans and prognosis.

objectivesDescribe the type and frequency of abnormalities found by AUS in dogs presenting with a neurological condition, identify risk factors associated with abnormalities, and evaluate treatment decisions based on findings. ANIMALS: Seven hundred and fifty-nine hospitalized dogs.

methodsRetrospective study. Medical records of dogs presented from 2007 to 2009 for neurologic disease were searched for signalment, neuroanatomic localization, and AUS findings. Whether dogs had advanced neurodiagnostics and treatment was analyzed.

resultsFifty-eight percent of dogs had abnormal findings on AUS. Probability of abnormalities increased with age (P < 0.001). Nondachshund breeds had higher probability of abnormal AUS than dachshunds (odds ratio [OR] = 1.87). Eleven percent of dogs did not have advanced neurodiagnostics and in 1.3%, this was because of abnormal AUS. Dogs with ultrasonographic abnormalities were less likely than dogs without to have advanced neurodiagnostics (OR = 0.3 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.17, 0.52]), however, the probability of performing advanced diagnostics was high regardless of normal (OR = 0.95 [95% CI: 0.92, 0.97]) or abnormal (OR = 0.85 [95% CI: 0.81, 0.88]) AUS. Treatment was more often pursued in small dogs and less often in dogs with brain disease. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Findings from screening AUS had a small negative effect on the likelihood of pursuing advanced neurodiagnostics. Although it should be included in the extracranial diagnostic workup in dogs with significant history or physical examination abnormalities, AUS is considered a low-yield diagnostic test in young dogs and dachshunds.

Indexed as

AbdomenAge FactorsAnimalsDog DiseasesDogsFemaleMaleNervous System DiseasesRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSpecies SpecificityUltrasonographyComputed tomographyMagnetic resonance imagingMyelogramUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID25900766
PMCPMC4895405
OpenAlexW2037831072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.