ArticleCureus2020
The Results of Abdominopelvic Computed Tomography Interpreted via Remote Access for the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAbdominal computed tomography (CT) is one of the imaging modalities for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis (AA). Today, CT scans can be interpreted via remote access called tele-radiology, besides conventional methods. The objective of this study was to evaluate the CT interpreted via tele-radiology for diagnosing AA.
methodsIn this retrospective study, a total of 679 patients, who were interpreted via tele-radiology of CT due to suspicion of AA, were evaluated. Age, gender, CT findings, pathology results and intra-operative diagnosis of those with normal CT results were analysed. A sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of CT in the diagnosis of AA were calculated.
results520 patients who were operated with pre-diagnosed AA were found. Of those, 441 patients (84.8%) were diagnosed with AA according to CT reports, out of which 368 (83.4%) were positive (true-positive) and 73 (16.6%) were negative (false-positive) in terms of pathology results. In the remaining operated 79 patients with normal CT results, 58 (73.4%) were positive for AA and 21 (26.6%) (negative laparotomy) were negative for AA in terms of pathological examination. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV of CT in the diagnosis of AA were determined as 81.2%, 67.7%, 76.7%, 83.4% and 64.2%, respectively.
conclusionThe sensitivity and PPV rates were found similar in both conventional and tele-radiological methods. However, specificity, accuracy and NPV rates were determined lower than in literature. Additionally, the negative laparotomy rate was higher than the conventional method.
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.