Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34143230›Full record

SynthesisSkeletal radiology2022

Reporting errors in plain radiographs for lower limb trauma-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Thomas York, Christopher Franklin, Kate Reynolds, Greg Munro, Heloise Jenney, William Harland, Darren Leong

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Skeletal radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. After-hour trauma-radiograph interpretation in the emergency centre of a District Hospital.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2022
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Thomas YorkGuys and St Thomas' NHS Trust, St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK. thomas.york@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3946-561X
Christopher FranklinLondon Northwest University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Kate ReynoldsLondon Northwest University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Greg MunroLondon Northwest University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Heloise JenneyLondon Northwest University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
William HarlandLondon Northwest University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Darren LeongLondon Northwest University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
St Thomas' Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPlain radiographs are a globally ubiquitous means of investigation for injuries to the musculoskeletal system. Despite this, initial interpretation remains a challenge and inaccuracies give rise to adverse sequelae for patients and healthcare providers alike. This study sought to address the limited, existing meta-analytic research on the initial reporting of radiographs for skeletal trauma, with specific regard to diagnostic accuracy of the most commonly injured region of the appendicular skeleton, the lower limb.

methodA prospectively registered, systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using published research from the major clinical-science databases. Studies identified as appropriate for inclusion underwent methodological quality and risk of bias analysis. Meta-analysis was then performed to establish summary rates for specificity and sensitivity of diagnostic accuracy, including covariates by anatomical site, using HSROC and bivariate models.

resultsA total of 3887 articles were screened, with 10 identified as suitable for analysis based on the eligibility criteria. Sensitivity and specificity across the studies were 93.5% and 89.7% respectively. Compared with other anatomical subdivisions, interpretation of ankle radiographs yielded the highest sensitivity and specificity, with values of 98.1% and 94.6% respectively, and a diagnostic odds ratio of 929.97.

conclusionInterpretation of lower limb skeletal radiographs operates at a reasonably high degree of sensitivity and specificity. However, one in twenty true positives is missed on initial radiographic interpretation and safety netting systems need to be established to address this. Virtual fracture clinic reviews and teleradiology services in conjunction with novel technology will likely be crucial in these circumstances.

Indexed as

Lower ExtremityHumansRadiographySensitivity and SpecificityAccuracyEmergencyFoot and ankleInitial reportingKneeLower limbReporting errorsSkeletal radiographsTrauma radiographs

Identifiers

PMID34143230
PMCPMC8626392
OpenAlexW3166500220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.