Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31820269›Full record

ArticleEmergency radiology2020

Pediatric cervical spine injuries on CT: difference in accuracy of interpretations by pediatric versus non-pediatric radiologists.

Nabil Hassan, Chloe Butler, James DeCou, Teri Crumb, Stephanie Flohr, Diann Reischman, Joseph Junewick

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. The diagnostic accuracy of community spine radiology for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace candidates.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Article
  3. Observational
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Nabil HassanDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, OSF Healthcare Children's Hospital of Illinois, 530 NE Glen Oak Ave, Peoria, IL, 61637, USA.
Chloe ButlerMercy Medical Center, P.O. Box 14584, Des Moines, IA, 50306-3584, USA.
James DeCouDepartment of Surgery, Helen DeVos Children's Hospital, 100 Michigan St. NE, Grand Rapids, MI, 49503, USA.
Teri CrumbDepartment of Surgery, Helen DeVos Children's Hospital, 100 Michigan St. NE, Grand Rapids, MI, 49503, USA.
Stephanie FlohrDepartment of Surgery, Helen DeVos Children's Hospital, 100 Michigan St. NE, Grand Rapids, MI, 49503, USA.
Diann ReischmanDepartment of Epidemiology, Grand Valley State University, A-1-178 Mackinac Hall, Allendale, MI, 49401, USA.
Joseph JunewickAdvanced Radiology Services PC, Grand Rapids, MI, USA. jjunewick@advancedrad.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9356-5606
Helen DeVos Children's Hospital · USChildren's Hospital of Illinois · USGrand Rapids Community College · USGrand Valley State University · USMercy Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo retrospectively compare the accuracy of interpretation of initial cervical computerized tomography (CCT) by a non-pediatric radiologist (NPR) versus a pediatric radiologist (PR).

methodsIRB approval and consent waiver were granted to review all injured children from 2010 to 2014 in the trauma registry with CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical spine. Patients with negative CCT who subsequently had positive MRI from a single institution comprised the study group. Patients with negative CCT and MRI, matched by age, gender, and severity scores, comprised the control group. The CCTs from both groups were initially interpreted at the time of service by a NPR. Subsequently, a single PR with 20 years of experience blinded to clinical/imaging data reinterpreted these CCT examinations. CT interpretations were then compared with MRI results and evaluated for statistical significance using SSPS software. The data analysis utilized summary statistics, two-tailed binomial test, and univariate χ

resultsThe study group was comprised of the 21 patients with negative CCT and positive MRI. Of the cohort included, 76% (16) were male and 24% (5) were female. The age range was 1 month-17 years, with a mean age of 9.7 years. CCT interpretation by NPR had a specificity of 91.7% (sensitivity 71.2%, positive predictive value 81.3%, and negative predictive value 86.3%) compared with results of MRI. Six of the 21 negative CCTs were interpreted by the PR as positive, mainly craniocervical junction injuries, and confirmed by MRI (28.6%, P < .001 compared with the NPR); no control CCT was interpreted by the PR as positive (sensitivity 100%, positive predictive value 100%, and negative predictive value 58.3%).

conclusionIn our retrospective study, a pediatric radiologist has improved recognition of pediatric cervical spine injuries on CT compared with non-pediatric radiologist.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceAdolescentCervical VertebraeChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInjury Severity ScoreMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePediatriciansPredictive Value of TestsRadiologistsRegistriesReproducibility of ResultsCervical spine injuriesPediatric radiologistPediatricsPediatric trauma

Identifiers

PMID31820269
OpenAlexW2991922075

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.