Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35193634›Full record

ArticleChiropractic & manual therapies2022

Appropriateness of referrals from primary care for lumbar MRI.

Susanne Brogaard Krogh, Tue Secher Jensen, Nanna Rolving, Janus Nikolaj Laust Thomsen, Casper Brink Hansen, Christoffer Høj Werenberg, Erik Rasmussen, Rune Carlson, Rikke Krüger Jensen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Defining a theoretical framework for a quality referral at the primary-secondary care interface: a systematic scoping review with qualitative content analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  3. Pertinence of magnetic resonance imaging in lumbar pain: a prospective surgeon-based evaluation of diagnostic concordance and therapeutic impact.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Susanne Brogaard KroghDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Silkeborg, Denmark. susako@rm.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-4563-8548
Tue Secher JensenDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Silkeborg, Denmark.
Nanna RolvingDEFACTUM, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.
Janus Nikolaj Laust ThomsenCenter for General Practice, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Casper Brink HansenDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Christoffer Høj WerenbergDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Erik RasmussenDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Rune CarlsonDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Rikke Krüger JensenDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
University of Southern Denmark · DKAalborg University · DKCentral Denmark Region · DKRegionshospitalet Silkeborg · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternational guidelines do not recommend routine imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and seek to guide clinicians only to refer for imaging based on specific indications. Despite this, several studies show an increase in the use of MRI among patients with low back pain (LBP) and an imbalance between appropriate versus inappropriate use of MRI for LBP. This study aimed to investigate to what extent referrals from general practice for lumbar MRI complied with clinical guideline recommendations in a Danish setting, contributing to the understanding and approaches to lumbar MRI for all clinicians managing LBP in the primary sector. MATERIALS AND

methodsFrom 2014 to 2018, all referrals for lumbar MRI were included from general practitioners in the Central Denmark Region for diagnostic imaging at a public regional hospital. A modified version of the American College of Radiology Imaging Appropriateness Criteria for LBP was used to classify referrals as appropriate or inappropriate, based on the unstructured text in the GPs' referrals. Appropriate referrals included fractures, cancer, symptoms persisting for more than 6 weeks of non-surgical treatment, previous surgery, candidate for surgery or suspicion of cauda equina. Inappropriate referrals were sub-classified as lacking information about previous non-surgical treatment and duration.

resultsOf the 3772 retrieved referrals for MRI of the lumbar spine, 55% were selected and a total of 2051 referrals were categorised. Approximately one quarter (24.5%) were categorised as appropriate, and 75.5% were deemed inappropriate. 51% of the inappropriate referrals lacked information about previous non-surgical treatment, and 49% had no information about the duration of non-surgical treatment. Apart from minor yearly fluctuations, there was no change in the distribution of appropriate and inappropriate MRI referrals from 2014 to 2018.

conclusionThe majority of lumbar MRI referrals (75.5%) from general practitioners for lumbar MRI did not fulfil the ACR Imaging Appropriateness Criteria for LBP based on the unstructured text of their referrals. There is a need for referrers to include all guideline-relevant information in referrals for imaging. More research is needed to determine whether this is due to patients not fulfilling guideline recommendations or simply the content of the referrals.

Indexed as

Low Back PainLumbosacral RegionHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationImaging appropriatenessLow back painMRI

Identifiers

PMID35193634
PMCPMC8862387
OpenAlexW4220779350

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.