Trial reportBMC health services research2019
Overuse of plain abdominal radiography in emergency departments: a retrospective cohort study.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02980081 (Abdominal Plain X-ray in the Emergency Departement), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Abdominal Plain X-ray in the Emergency Departement: Really Usefull?
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inappropriate imaging requests in abdominal imaging: observations from the MIDAS study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial in Germany.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Trial
- Diagnostic utility of abdominal radiography in emergency departments with high guideline compliance: a retrospective cohort study.Emergency radiology · 2026Article
- Trends in visits, imaging, and diagnosis for emergency department abdominal pain presentations in the United States, 2007-2019.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025Article
- The utility of the abdominal series in the emergency setting: a retrospective review.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Measuring appropriateness of diagnostic imaging: a scoping review.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Evaluation of abdominal gas by plain abdominal radiographs.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2023Article
- Are We Following iRefer Guidelines From the Royal College of Radiology When Requesting Abdominal X-rays?Cureus · 2022Article
- Understanding radiographic decision-making when imaging obese patients: A Think-Aloud study.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlain abdominal radiography (PAR) is routinely performed in emergency departments (EDs). This study aimed to (1) identify the indications for PAR in EDs and compare them against international guidelines, (2) uncover predictors of non-compliance with guidelines, and (3) describe the use of additional radiological examinations in EDs.
methodsRetrospective cohort study in the EDs of two hospitals in Geneva, Switzerland, including all adult patients who underwent PAR in the EDs. Indications were considered "appropriate" if complying with guidelines. Predictors of non-compliance were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses.
resultsOver 1 year, PAR was performed in 1997 patients (2.2% of all admissions). Their mean age was 59.7 years, with 53.1% of female patients. The most common indications were constipation (30.8%), suspected ileus (28.9%), and abdominal pain (15.3%). According to the French and American guidelines, only 11.8% of the PARs were indicated, while 46.2% of them complied with the Australian and British guidelines. On multivariate analysis, admission to the private hospital ED (odds ratio [OR] 3.88, 95% CI 1.78-8.45), female gender (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.46-2.59), and an age > 65 years (OR 2.41, 95%CI 1.74-3.32) were associated with a higher risk of inappropriate PAR. Additional radiological examinations were performed in 73.7% of patients.
conclusionsMost indications for PAR did not comply with guidelines and elderly women appeared particularly at risk of being exposed to inappropriate examination. PAR did not prevent the need for additional examinations. Local guidelines should be developed, and initiatives should be implemented to reduce unnecessary PARs.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , identifier NCT02980081 .
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.