ReviewArchives of academic emergency medicine2020
Accuracy of Canadian CT Head Rule and New Orleans Criteria for Minor Head Trauma; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Risk factors for traumatic intracranial hemorrhage in mild traumatic brain injury patients at the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024Pooled it
- GFAP and UCH-L1 for Ruling out Intracranial Lesions After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- CT Brain Utilization After Low-Risk Head Injury in Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Literature Review.Cureus · 2026Article
- Digitalizing English-language CT Interpretation for Positive Haemorrhage Evaluation Reporting: the DECIPHER study.BMJ health & care informatics · 2025Article
- Assessing the role of chest CT in minor blunt trauma: evaluation of the NEXUS decision instrument across an expanded population.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Comparison of scoring systems for patients with head injury presenting to the emergency department.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Observational
- Clinical decision rules in predicting computed tomography scan findings and need for neurosurgical intervention in mild traumatic brain injury: a prospective observational study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Observational
- Higher risk of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy compared to oral anticoagulation-a single-center experience.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Article
- Traumatic Brain Injury in Patients under Anticoagulant Therapy: Review of Management in Emergency Department.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Consideration of Brain CT Imaging Standard for Mild Head Injuries.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2024Article
- Multi-centric study for development and validation of a CT head rule for mild traumatic brain injury in direct oral anticoagulants: the HERO-M nomogram.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Blood Glucose Level as a Predictor of Abnormal Brain Computed Tomography Scan Findings in Patients with Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.Bulletin of emergency and trauma · 2023Article
- An Assessment of the Diagnostic Value in Syncope Workup: A Retrospective Study.HCA healthcare journal of medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe present meta-analysis has two objectives; primarily, the predictive values of Canadian computed tomography (CT) head rule (CCHR) and New Orleans Criteria (NOC) will be compared. Secondly, the possibility of interchangeable use of the two models in cases of contraindication will be evaluated.
methodsAn extensive search was performed in Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science electronic databases from the inception of databases until the end of July 2020. All prospective and retrospective observational and diagnostic accuracy studies comparing NOC and CCHR on a single group of patients were included. Data were entered to STATA 14.0 statistical program, and analyses were performed using "
resultsData from 14 articles were included (21140 samples). Summary sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CCHR in prediction of positive CT findings were 89.8% (95% CI: 79.6 to 95.2), 38.3% (95% CI: 34.0 to 42.8), and 5.5 (95% CI: 2.3 to 13.1), respectively. In addition, summary sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of NOC in prediction of positive CT findings were 97.2% (95% CI: 89.7 to 99.2), 12.3% (95% CI: 7.4 to 19.8), and 4.8 (95% CI: 1.2 to 18.3), respectively. Summary sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CCHR in prediction of clinically important TBI (ciTBI) in mild TBI patients were 92.5% (95% CI: 79.5 to 97.5), 40.1% (95% CI: 34.8 to 45.6), and 8.3 (95% CI: 2.4 to 29.2), respectively. In addition, summary sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of NOC in prediction of ciTBI were 98.3% (95% CI: 93.8 to 99.6), 8.5% (95% CI: 4.8 to 14.5), and 5.4 (95% CI: 1.5 to 20.0), respectively.
conclusionThe present meta-analysis demonstrated that both CCHR and NOC scores have a good predictive value in predicting the presence of abnormal findings in CT scan and ciTBI. The similar performance of CCHR and NOC models results in their interchangeable use in cases of contraindication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33244515PMC7682632W3100144975What 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.