Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35365522›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Optimising diagnostics to discriminate complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis: a prospective cohort study protocol.

Wouter J Bom, Jochem C G Scheijmans, Sander Ubels, Anna A W van Geloven, Sarah L Gans, Kristien M A J Tytgat, Charles C van Rossem, Lianne Koens, Jaap Stoker, Willem A Bemelman and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Diagnostic accuracy of doctors at the emergency department and radiologists in differentiating between complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Wouter J BomDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jochem C G ScheijmansDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands j.c.scheijmans@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-3160-2448
Sander UbelsDepartement of Surgery, Universitair Medisch Centrum Sint Radboud, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Anna A W van GelovenSurgery, Tergooi Hospitals, Hilversum, The Netherlands.
Sarah L GansDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kristien M A J TytgatGastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Charles C van RossemSurgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Lianne KoensPathology, Amsterdam Universitair Medische Centra, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jaap StokerDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Willem A BemelmanDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcel G W DijkgraafClinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam UMC - Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0750-8790
Marja A BoermeesterDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLTergooi · NLMaasstad Ziekenhuis · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGrowing evidence is showing that complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis are two different entities that may be treated differently. A correct diagnosis of the type of appendicitis is therefore essential. The Scoring system of Appendicitis Severity (SAS) combines clinical, laboratory and imaging findings. The SAS rules out complicated appendicitis in 95% (negative predictive value, NPV) and detects 95% (sensitivity) of patients with complicated appendicitis in adults suspected of acute appendicitis. However, this scoring system has not yet been validated externally. In this study, we aim to provide a prospective external validation of the SAS in a new cohort of patients with clinical suspicion of appendicitis. We will optimise the score when necessary. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The SAS will be validated in 795 consecutive adult patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis confirmed by imaging. Data will be collected prospectively in multiple centres. The predicted diagnosis based on the SAS score will be compared with the combined surgical and histological diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy for ruling out complicated appendicitis will be calculated. If the SAS does not reach a sensitivity and NPV of 95% in its present form, the score will be optimised. After optimisation, a second external validation will be performed in a new group of 328 patients. Furthermore, the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical perspective of the treating physician for differentiation between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and the patient's preferences for different treatment options will be assessed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the Amsterdam UMC Medical Ethics Committee (reference W19_416 # 19.483). Because of the observational nature of this study, the study does not fall under the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act. Results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals. This protocol is submitted for publication before analysis of the results.

Indexed as

AppendicitisAcute DiseaseAdultCohort StudiesHumansObservational Studies as TopicPredictive Value of TestsProspective Studiescolorectal surgerygastroenterologyradiology & imagingsurgery

Identifiers

PMID35365522
PMCPMC8977816
OpenAlexW4221106302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.