ArticleEmergency radiology2018
Clinical impact of computed tomography in the emergency department in nontraumatic chest and abdominal conditions.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic hypotheses and acute tomographic findings in the emergency room of a tertiary hospital: an accuracy study.Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2026Article
- The utility of computed tomography at a district-level public hospital in Cape Town.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2024Article
- Multidetector CT Imaging Biomarkers as Predictors of Prognosis in Shock: Updates and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Renal venous density in the arterial phase of contrast-enhanced CT predicts prognosis in septic shock.The British journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Computed tomography imaging of septic shock. Beyond the cause: the "CT hypoperfusion complex". A pictorial essay.Insights into imaging · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the clinical impact of CT scan in modifying the clinical management in patients referred to the emergency department.
methodsWe prospectively evaluated 300 patients (177 males, 63 ± 18 years old) admitted in the emergency department (ED) of a single institution, who underwent a CT examination for thoracic and/or abdominal complains. Demographic and clinical data were collected. Hypothesized outcome prior to CT scan and final management (i.e., discharge, short observation in the ED, hospitalization, and department of admission) were compared.
resultsAfter CT examination, a major variation in diagnosis occurred in 37% of cases and clinical management changed in 43%, occurring in 51% of patients who underwent abdominal CT, in 40% of chest CT, and in 29% of chest/abdominal CT (P = 0.015). Department of hospitalization changed in 26% of cases (P < 0.001). Clinical impact of CT scan was significantly associated (P = 0.001) with the color code at admission. In particular, the more severe was the clinical condition, the lower was the variation of management after CT examination.
conclusionsThis work confirms the crucial role of CT examination in the management of nontraumatic patients admitted to the ED, both in terms of better clarifying the diagnosis and in influencing the clinical management.
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.