ArticleEuropean radiology2020
Avoiding skull radiographs in infants with suspected inflicted injury who also undergo head CT: "a no-brainer?"
Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computed tomography versus radiography for the detection of rib and skull fractures in paediatric suspected physical abuse: a systematic review.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Rib fracture diagnosis in suspected abuse: Computed tomography or radiographs (RECEPTOR)? A multicentre diagnostic accuracy observational study.European radiology · 2026Observational
- Skeletal surveys for suspected infant abuse: patient-specific radiation dose estimation using a hybrid computational phantom.Pediatric radiology · 2025Article
- Optimizing radiography education: Adapting curricula to evolving clinical practices in UAE healthcare.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Advances and Challenges in Traumatic Brain Injury from a Forensic Perspective.Current neuropharmacology · 2025Review
- Controversial aspects of imaging in child abuse: a second roundtable discussion from the ESPR child abuse taskforce.Pediatric radiology · 2023Article
- Head Injury during Childbirth.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2022Article
- Abusive head trauma in children: radiographs of the skull do not provide additional information in the diagnosis of skull fracture when multiplanar computed tomography with three-dimensional reconstructions is available.Pediatric radiology · 2022Article
- Deep Learning-Assisted Diagnosis of Pediatric Skull Fractures on Plain Radiographs.Korean journal of radiology · 2022Article
- Pictorial review of the postmortem computed tomography in neonaticide cases.International journal of legal medicine · 2021Review
- Sibling screening in suspected abusive head trauma: a proposed guideline.Pediatric radiology · 2021Review
- Utility of three-dimensional and reformatted head computed tomography images in the evaluation of pediatric abusive head trauma.Pediatric radiology · 2021Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess whether head CT with 3D reconstruction can replace skull radiographs (SXR) in the imaging investigation of suspected physical abuse (SPA)/abusive head trauma (AHT).
methodsPACS was interrogated for antemortem skeletal surveys performed for SPA, patients younger than 2 years, SXR and CT performed within 4 days of each other. Paired SXR and CT were independently reviewed. One reviewer analysed CT without and (3 months later) with 3D reconstructions. SXR and CT expert consensus review formed the gold standard. Observer reliability was calculated.
resultsA total of 104 SXR/CT examination pairs were identified, mean age 6.75 months (range 4 days to 2 years); 21 (20%) had skull fractures; two fractures on CT were missed on SXR. There were no fractures on SXR that were not seen on CT. For SXR and CT, respectively: PPV reviewer 1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 48-82% and 85-100%; reviewer 2, 67-98% and 82-100%; and NPV reviewer 1, 95%, CI 88-98% and 96-100%; reviewer 2, 88-97% and 88-98%. Inter- and intra-observer reliability were respectively the following: SXR, excellent (kappa = 0.831) and good (kappa = 0.694); CT, excellent (kappa = 0.831) and perfect (kappa = 1). All results were statistically significant (p < 0.001).
conclusionsCT has greater diagnostic accuracy than SXR in detecting skull fractures which is increased on concurrent review of 3D reconstructions and should be performed in every case of SPA/AHT. SXR does not add further diagnostic information and can be omitted from the skeletal survey when CT with 3D reconstruction is going to be, or has been, performed. KEY POINTS: • Head CT with 3D reconstruction is more sensitive and specific for the diagnosis of skull fractures. • Skull radiographs can be safely omitted from the initial skeletal survey performed for suspected physical abuse when head CT with 3D reconstruction is going to be, or has been, performed.
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.