ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2022
Diagnostic values of supine and erect abdominal radiographs for patients with acute abdomen: which is better for decision making?
Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lesson from a Single Pediatric Emergency Department: Potentially Applicable Radiation-Minimizing Practices for Non-Traumatic Abdominal Pain in Adolescents.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Supine and erect abdominal radiographs are both feasible in patients with acute abdomen.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlain abdominal radiography including supine and erect abdominal radiographs (SAR and EAR) is a frequently used image modality for preliminary evaluation of acute abdomen. We aimed to explore which one of the SAR or EAR has a higher diagnostic value in overall diagnosis of acute abdomen, including their respective advantages over each other for the various underlying diseases.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the imaging findings of plain abdominal radiography of patients with acute abdomen who received abdominal computed tomography (CT) within 24 hours at the emergency department of a medical center in northern Taiwan between October 2019 and February 2020. Final diagnosis was made by CT reports and clinical data. The relevance between the imaging findings and clinical diagnosis in the groups of SAR and EAR were compared.
resultsA total of 1009 cases with acute abdomen were included, of which 341 (33.8%) underwent EAR and 668 (66.2%) underwent SAR. Among them, 820 cases had final diagnosis confirmed by CT and clinical data. In comparison of the diagnostic relevance of SAR and EAR, there were no significant difference in the overall acute abdomen, but EAR showed a better diagnostic relevance in cases with bowel obstruction than SAR did (100% vs 87.2%, p < 0.05). No statistical difference in other abdominal diseases.
conclusionThere is no significant difference between SAR and EAR in evaluation of overall acute abdomen. However, EARs has a diagnostic advantage over SAR for evaluation of suspected bowel obstruction.
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.