ArticleEmergency (Tehran, Iran)2017
The Accuracy of Emergency Physicians in Ultrasonographic Screening of Acute Appendicitis; a Cross Sectional Study.
Article in Emergency (Tehran, Iran), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Abdominal Ultrasound and Its Diagnostic Accuracy in Diagnosing Acute Appendicitis: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Accuracy of Alvarado, Eskelinen, Ohmann, RIPASA and Tzanakis Scores in Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis; a Cross-sectional Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2020Article
- Comparing Sensitivity of Ultrasonography and Plain Chest Radiography in Detection of Pneumonia; a Diagnostic Value Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Ultrasonography in Emergency Department; a Diagnostic Tool for Better Examination and Decision-Making.Advanced journal of emergency medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiagnostic values reported for ultrasonographic screening of acute appendicitis vary widely and are dependent on the operator's skill, patient's gender, weight, etc. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of operator skill on the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography in detection of appendicitis by comparing the results of ultrasonography done by radiologists and emergency physicians.
methodsThis prospective diagnostic accuracy was carried out on patients suspected to acute appendicitis presenting to EDs of 2 hospitals. After the initial clinical examinations, all the patients underwent ultrasonography for appendicitis by emergency physician and radiologist, respectively. The final diagnosis of appendicitis was based on either pathology report or 48-hour follow-up. Screening performance characteristics of appendix ultrasonography by emergency physician and radiologist were compared using STATA 11.0 software.
results108 patients with the mean age of 23.91 ± 7.46 years were studied (61.1% male). Appendicitis was confirmed for 37 (34.26%) cases. Cohen's kappa coefficient between ultrasonography by the radiologist and emergency physician in diagnosis of acute appendicitis was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.35 - 0.76). Area under the ROC curve of ultrasonography in appendicitis diagnosis was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69 - 0.86) for emergency physician and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81 - 0.94) for radiologist (p = 0.052). Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography by radiologist and emergency physician in appendicitis diagnosis were 83.87% (95% CI: 67.32 - 93.23), 91.5% (95% CI: 81.89 - 96.52), 72.97% (95% CI: 55.61 - 85.63), and 83.10% (95% CI: 71.94 - 90.59), respectively.
conclusionFindings of the present study showed that the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography carried out by radiologist (89%) is a little better compared to that of emergency physician (80%) in diagnosis of appendicitis, but none are excellent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28286829PMC5325891W2507241360What 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.