ArticleEuropean radiology2021
Whole-body MR imaging in suspected physical child abuse: comparison with skeletal survey and bone scintigraphy findings from the PEDIMA prospective multicentre study.
Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01743703 (Utility of Whole-body MRI), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Utility of Whole-body MRI (STIR and Diffusion Weighted) in the Detection of Traumatic Injuries of Undetermined Origin in Children
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reply to the Letter to the Editor: Rib fracture diagnosis in suspected abuse-clinical and methodological considerations.European radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the contribution of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) and bone scintigraphy (BS) in addition to skeletal survey (SS) in detecting traumatic bone lesions and soft-tissue injuries in suspected child abuse.
methodsIn this prospective, multicentre, diagnostic accuracy study, children less than 3 years of age with suspected physical abuse were recruited. Each child underwent SS, BS and WBMRI. A blinded first review was performed in consensus by five paediatric radiologists and three nuclear medicine physicians. A second review investigated discrepancies reported between the modalities using a consensus result of all modalities as the reference standard. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity and corresponding 95% confidence interval for each imaging modality (SS, WBMRI and BS) and for the combinations [SS + WBMRI] and [SS + BS].
resultsOne hundred seventy children were included of which sixty-four had at least one lesion. In total, 146 lesions were included. The sensitivity and specificity of each examination were, respectively, as follows: 88.4% [95% CI, 82.0-93.1] and 99.7% [95% CI, 99.5-99.8] for the SS, 69.9% [95% CI, 61.7-77.2] and 99.5% [95% CI, 99.2-99.7] for WBMRI and 54.8% [95% CI, 46.4-63.0] and 99.7% [95% CI, 99.5-99.9] for BS. Sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 95.9% [95% CI, 91.3-98.5] and 99.2% [95% CI, 98.9-99.4] for the combination SS + WBMRI and 95.2% [95% CI, 90.4-98.1] and 99.4% [95% CI, 99.2-99.6] for the combination SS + BS, with no statistically significant difference between them.
conclusionSS was the most sensitive independent imaging modality; however, the additional combination of either WBMRI or BS examinations offered an increased accuracy. KEY POINTS: • SS in suspected infant abuse was the most sensitive independent imaging modality in this study, especially for detecting metaphyseal and rib lesions, and remains essential for evaluation. • The combination of either SS + BS or SS + WBMRI provides greater accuracy in diagnosing occult and equivocal bone injuries in the difficult setting of child abuse. • WBMRI is a free-radiation technique that allows additional diagnosis of soft-tissue and visceral injuries.
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.