Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33209569›Full record

ArticleJournal of acute medicine2020

Frequency, Recognition, and Potential Risk Factors of Incidental Findings on Trauma Computed Tomography Scans: A Cross-Sectional Study at an Urban Level One Trauma Center.

Wei-An Lai, Pang-Hsu Liu, Ming-Jen Tsai, Ying Chieh Huang

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of acute medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wei-An LaiDitmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital Department of Emergency Medicine Chiayi City Taiwan.
Pang-Hsu LiuDitmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital Department of Emergency Medicine Chiayi City Taiwan.
Ming-Jen TsaiDitmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital Department of Emergency Medicine Chiayi City Taiwan.
Ying Chieh HuangDitmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital Department of Emergency Medicine Chiayi City Taiwan.
Chia-Yi Christian Hospital · TWKaohsiung Medical University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComputed tomography (CT) use in injured patients has continuously increased in the past decades. We designed and undertook this study to evaluate the frequency, and potential risks of incidental findings (IFs), and how they were processed in trauma patients receiving CT scans.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed CT scans, official CT reports, and basic demographics in trauma patients who received CT scans at our emergency department in 2016. Scans with IFs prompted a detailed review of medical records to determine clinical significance and how they were processed. IFs were classified into three categories: category I (potentially severe condition, in-time management required), category II (not urgent, follow-up needed), and category III (of minor concern). Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to determine patient characteristics associated with IFs.

resultsIn the 4,092 scans enrolled, IFs were identified in 649 (15.9%). There were 13 (2.0%) category I, 306 (47.2%) category II, and 330 (50.8%) category III IFs. Patients with IFs were older than those without. No sex-based difference was found. Most (61.5%) of the scans were performed for the head; however, the abdomen had the highest IF prevalence (26.2%). Documentation about IFs was poor; 31% of category I, 91.9% of category II, and 97.0% of category III have no related record. Old age remains the risk predicting the presence of IFs, and every year of increasing age was independently associated with a higher prevalence of IFs (OR: 1.019; 95% CI: 1.015-1.024).

conclusionsIFs are common in trauma CT scans; however, recognition and management remain poor. Abdomen and chest scans, and CT in older patients should remind us of increasing risks of IFs.

Indexed as

computed tomographyincidental fi ndingsinjuriesmalpracticepatient safety

Identifiers

PMID33209569
PMCPMC7662100
OpenAlexW3104537892

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.