SynthesisEmergency radiology2019
Multi-detector CT for suspected hip fragility fractures: A diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Emergency radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does Preoperative CT Improve Outcomes in Femoral Neck Fracture Fixation? A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical utility of a focused hip MRI for assessing suspected hip fracture in the emergency department.Emergency radiology · 2021Article
- Update on Imaging-Based Measurement of Bone Mineral Density and Quality.Current rheumatology reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To perform a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of Multi-Detector Computed Tomography (MDCT) for detecting proximal femoral (hip) fragility fractures in patients with a negative initial radiograph. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to identify relevant studies published between January 2000 and May 2018. Articles underwent title and abstract screening followed by full-text screening. Study inclusion criteria are patients with suspected hip fracture, negative initial radiograph, MDCT as the index test, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or clinical follow-up as the reference standard, and DTA measure as the outcome. Demographic, methodologic, and study outcome data were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. DTA metrics were pooled using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. From an initial 1385 studies, four studies reporting on 418 patients (174 with hip fractures) were included. Pooled summary statistics included the following: sensitivity (87%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 79-93), specificity (98%; 95% CI 95-99), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (0.972). MDCT has a high specificity for detecting hip fragility fractures, comparable to MRI, but a lower sensitivity. Local institutional factors may play a role in whether a patient receives MDCT or MRI, as imaging should not be delayed. If there is ongoing concern for fracture in a patient with a negative MDCT, MRI should be performed. Cautious interpretation of the results is warranted given the risk of bias and small sample size.
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.