Observational studyWorld journal of surgery2022
Interpretation of Emergency CT Scans of the Head in Trauma: Neurosurgeon vs Radiologist.
Observational study in World journal of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computed tomography signs of intracranial hypertension: what intensivists should know.Critical care science · 2026Article
- Evaluation of radiologists' accuracy and interrater reliability when interpreting CT scans after ventral hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Ten year analysis of missed injuries at a major trauma centre in South Africa.Surgery in practice and science · 2023Article
- Surgeon accuracy and interrater reliability when interpreting CT scans after ventral hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity across all ages in all countries. Management of the patient with TBI is time critical. Emergency computed tomography (CT) scans of the head are often assessed by neurosurgeons and patient management plans are implemented before the final radiological report is released in hospitals, particularly where there is a shortage of radiologists in LMIC. The aims of this study were to identify discrepancies in the interpretation of CT scans of the head in patients with isolated head injury between the neurosurgeon and radiologist and to assess if these differences impacted patient management.
methodsThis 6-month long prospective observational study was performed at a tertiary hospital in South Africa. The study population comprised 347 patients with isolated head injury who had a CT scan of the head performed on admission. The neurosurgeons' initial CT scan interpretation and the final radiological report were compared.
resultsOut of 347 CT head scans, the neurosurgeons correctly interpreted 318 cases. Of the 29 incorrectly interpreted cases, there were 17 false negatives and 12 cases with mismatching abnormalities. The concordance rate was 91.64% (95% CI 88.73-94.55) with a kappa of 0.78. An accuracy rate of 95.33% (95% CI 92.63-97.26) was achieved by the neurosurgeon. No patient was negatively impacted by any neurosurgical error in misinterpretation.
conclusionsIn the interpretation of CT head scans in trauma, there is good neurosurgical and radiological interobserver agreement without negative patient impact. The neurosurgeons' interpretation of CT scans of the head in TBI is safe especially when radiology reports are not timeously available.
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.