Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30911649›Full record

ArticlePleura and peritoneum2017

(F)utility of computed tomography of the chest in the presence of pleural effusion.

Tilak Pathak, Malvinder S Parmar

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pleura and peritoneum, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tilak PathakClinical Observer, Timmins and District Hospital, Timmins, Ontario, Canada.
Malvinder S ParmarInternal Medicine, Timmins and District Hospital, 700 Ross Ave. East, Timmins, Ontario P4N 8P2, Canada.
Northern College · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPleural effusion is common and can cause significant morbidity. The chest X-ray is often the initial radiological test, but additional tests may be required to reduce uncertainty and to provide additional diagnostic information. However, additional exposure and unnecessary costs should be prevented. The objective of the study was to assess the clinical benefit of an additional chest computed tomography (CT) scan over plain chest X-ray alone in the management of patients with pleural effusion.

methodsRetrospective analysis in 94 consecutive patients with pleural effusion who underwent chest X-ray and CT scan over an 18-month period in a single institution. All chest X-ray and CT scan reports were compared and correlated with clinical parameters in order to assess their utility in the clinical management. No blinding was applied.

resultsIn 75 chest CT scan reports (80 %), information provided by the radiologist did not change clinical management when compared to plain chest X-ray alone and did not provide any additional information over chest X-ray. Only 2/49 (4 %) of the native chest CT scan reports provided clinically relevant information as compared to 17/45 (38 %) contrast-enhanced chest CT scan reports (p<0.001).

conclusionsIn this retrospective cohort of patients with pleural effusion, an additional chest CT scan was not useful in the majority of patients. However, if a chest CT scan is required, then a contrast-enhanced study after pleural aspiration should be performed. Further prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.

Indexed as

computed tomographycost-effectivenessimagingpleural effusionradiation exposure

Identifiers

PMID30911649
PMCPMC6405022
OpenAlexW2767261557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.