ReviewKorean journal of radiology2019
Radiation Safety in Emergency Medicine: Balancing the Benefits and Risks.
Review in Korean journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of S100B in Predicting Intracranial Abnormalities on CT Imaging Following Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Neurocritical care · 2025Pooled it
- Accuracy of GFAP and UCH-L1 in predicting brain abnormalities on CT scans after mild traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Pooled it
- The clinical performance of ultra-low-dose shoulder CT scans: The assessment on image and physical 3D printing models.PloS one · 2022Trial
- Communicating radiation risk in healthcare: an ethical imperative amidst scientific uncertainty.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Cancer Risk Associated With Radiological Examinations: 2025 Updates.Korean journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultra-Low Dose CT Compared to Standard Dose CT for Identification of Fresh Rib Fractures by Deep Learning Algorithm.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of ultra-low-dose CT compared to standard-dose CT for identification of non-displaced fractures of the shoulder, knee, ankle, and wrist.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Characteristics of Recent Articles Published in the Korean Journal of Radiology Based on the Citation Frequency.Korean journal of radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of computed tomography (CT) in emergency departments has increased over several decades, as physicians increasingly depend on imaging for diagnoses. Patients and medical personnel are put at risk due to frequent exposure to and higher levels of radiation, with very little evidence of improvements in outcomes. Here, we explore why CT imaging has a tendency to be overused in emergency departments and the obstacles that medical personnel face in ensuring patient safety. The solution requires cooperation from all emergency care stakeholders as well as the continuous education of doctors on how CT scans help in particular 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.