ArticleAcute medicine & surgery2019
Incidental findings on whole-body computed tomography in trauma patients: the current state of incidental findings and the effect of implementation of a feedback system.
Article in Acute medicine & surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Comparison of natural language processing algorithms in assessing the importance of head computed tomography reports written in Japanese.Japanese journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Expecting the unexpected: incidental findings at a level 1 trauma center.Emergency radiology · 2023Article
- Incidental Findings on Computerized Tomography Images of Trauma Cases.Archives of Iranian medicine · 2022Article
- Incidental CT Findings in the Elderly with Low-Energy Falls: Prevalence and Implications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimWhole-body computed tomography (CT) for trauma occasionally reveals significant incidental findings not related to trauma, which require an adequate response. In this study, we examined the current state of incidental findings in trauma patients on whole-body CT and the effects of the feedback system.
methodsThe subject sample included trauma patients who underwent whole-body CT while being examined for trauma during the 2-year period, with the interpretation of the CT reported by a radiologist. The frequency and recognition of incidental findings and the involved body region were investigated. The state of incidental findings before and after implementation of a radiography report feedback system was also examined.
resultsDuring the study period, whole-body CT revealed incidental findings in 79 of 199 trauma patients (40.1%). The mean age of the 79 patients with incidental findings was 62.8 ± 19.5 years, and the mean injury severity score was 16.6 ± 10.0. No difference was observed in the severity of trauma, age, or length of hospital stay. The incidental findings were related to the liver/gallbladder in 22 patients, kidneys in 17, lungs in 14, and the intracranial area in 13. The recognition rate of incidental findings after the implementation of the feedback system increased from 23.3% to 32.6%.
conclusionsConsidering that not all incidental findings are accurately recognized, a proper feedback system is required. A feedback system is beneficial and a need to ensure improvement in the recognition of incidental findings.
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.