ArticleThe British journal of radiology2018
Appropriateness of CT scans for patients with non-traumatic acute abdominal pain.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Value of Physical Examination, Ultrasound, and Radiography Compared to Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Nontraumatic Left Lower Quadrant Acute Abdominal Pain.Emergency medicine international · 2025Article
- Race and Ethnicity and Diagnostic Testing for Common Conditions in the Acute Care Setting.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Impact of connective tissue diseases on inpatient outcomes in gastrointestinal bleeding: insights from a national database analysis.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
- Inefficient Admissions for Abdominal Pain Under an Acute General Surgical Unit.World journal of surgery · 2023Article
- When Not to Operate on Acute Cases-A Surgeon's Perspective on Rapid Assessment of Emergency Abdominopelvic Computed Tomography.Journal of imaging · 2023Review
- Characterizing and quantifying low-value diagnostic imaging internationally: a scoping review.BMC medical imaging · 2022Article
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
objectiveAcute abdominal pain is the most common reason for surgical admission. CT scans are increasingly used to aid early diagnosis. Excessive use of CT scans is associated with increased length of stay, healthcare costs and radiation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of CT scans for patients presenting with acute abdominal pain.
methodsWe examined 100 consecutive patients presenting with new acute abdominal pain who underwent a CT scan. Clinical information available at the time the scan was ordered, was summarised and reviewed independently by five consultant general surgeons and five consultant radiologists.
resultsA CT scan was judged to be not indicated in a median of 21% of cases (range 12-53%), more information was required in a median of 16% (0-41%) and in a median of 58% (37-88%) the CT scan was considered indicated. There was a good level of agreement (Cronbach's α 0.704) across the 10 experts.
conclusionThese data suggest that a large proportion of CT scans for patients with acute abdominal pain are not clinically indicated or are being performed prior to adequate clinical work-up. Optimising CT scan requests for this patient group will improve use of healthcare resources. Advances in knowledge: Both radiologists and general surgeons agree that there is no indication for an abdominal CT scan for a patient presenting with acute abdominal pain in a median of 21% of the cases.
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.