SynthesisScientific reports2017
Diagnostic accuracy of contrast enhanced ultrasound in patients with blunt abdominal trauma presenting to the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in traumatic solid organ injuries in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Imaging and clinical features of intra-abdominal injuries in children with suspected physical abuse.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- RETRACTED: Artificial intelligence for emergency medical care.Health care science · 2025Review
- Expanding Role of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Elastography in the Evaluation of Abdominal Pathologies in Children.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in the management of pediatric renal injuries: where are we now?Journal of ultrasound · 2025Article
- The Diagnosis and Management of Pediatric Blunt Abdominal Trauma-A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Management of Pediatric Solid Organ Injuries.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Spread and feasibility of non-operative management (NOM) of traumatic splenic injuries in adults: a national survey.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Diagnostic options for blunt abdominal trauma.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Review
- The Technique and Advantages of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Follow-Up of Traumatic Abdomen Solid Organ Injuries.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of blunt abdominal trauma in children.Pediatric radiology · 2021Review
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in the follow-up of pediatric abdominal injuries: value and timing.Journal of ultrasound · 2020Article
- Delayed Rupture of a Normal Appearing Spleen After Trauma: Is Our Knowledge Enough? Two Case Reports.The American journal of case reports · 2020Article
- Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in pediatric blunt abdominal trauma.Journal of ultrasound · 2019Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in evaluating blunt abdominal trauma for patients presenting to the emergency department. Electronic search of Scopus and Pubmed was performed from inception to September 2016. Human studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS in identifying abdominal solid organ injuries were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS tool. A total of 10 studies were included in the study and 9 of them were included for meta-analysis. The log(DOR) values ranged from 3.80 (95% CI: 2.81-4.79) to 8.52 (95% CI: 4.58-12.47) in component studies. The combined log(DOR) was 6.56 (95% CI: 5.66-7.45). The Cochran's Q was 11.265 (p = 0.793 with 16 degrees of freedom), and the Higgins' I
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.