Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35722674›Full record

ArticleThe neuroradiology journal2023

Analysis of perceptual errors in skull-base pathology.

Stephen Vong, Jennifer Chang, Reza Assadsangabi, Vladimir Ivanovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The neuroradiology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Peer Learning in Neuroradiology: Not as Easy as It Sounds.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2023
    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

4 authors.

Stephen VongDepartment of Radiology, UC Davis Health, Sacramento, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3275-6916
Jennifer ChangDepartment of Radiology, UC Davis Health, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Reza AssadsangabiDepartment of Radiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Vladimir IvanovicDepartment of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMedical errors result in significant mortality and morbidity. The purpose of this study is to analyze skull-base errors at a single tertiary institution, identify common anatomic sites of errors, and offer strategies to reduce errors in this region.

methodsA Neuroradiology Quality Assurance Database of radiologic errors was searched for attending physician computer tomography and magnetic resonance imaging errors in skull-base pathology from 2014 to 2020. Data were limited to CT and MRI reports. Errors were separated into four subcategories (tumor, trauma, vascular, and congenital) and further divided by relevant anatomic site.

resultsA total of 90 skull-based errors were identified. Most errors were perceptual (87%), with common study types including MRI Brain (39%) and CT Head (24%). Most common errors were tumors (55%), followed by trauma (24%), vascular (10%), and congenital (7%). Six anatomic sites were identified and encompassed over half of errors (58%): sella, occipital bone, cerebellopontine angle/internal auditory canal (CPA/IAC), foramen magnum and clivus, cavernous sinus, and dural venous sinus. SUMMARY: Most of the skull-base errors were perceptual. Placing a strong emphasis on both the pathology and closely examining its critical anatomic site (sella, occipital bone, CPA/IAC, foramen magnum and clivus, cavernous sinus, and dural venous sinus) could potentially reduce up to 60% of errors in these regions.

Indexed as

Neuroradiologyquality improvementradiologic errorsskull-base

Identifiers

PMID35722674
PMCPMC10569193

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.