ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2022
Ultrasonographic evaluation of cecal appendix diameter in pediatric population.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Vivo Measurements of Appendiceal Base - Implications on Pediatric Laparoscopic Appendectomy.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsTrial
- Pediatric Ogilvie Syndrome Following Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Case Report and Literature Review.Cureus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo stratify ultrasound samples in a pediatric population undergoing evaluation for acute appendicitis to examine the variability in cecal appendix diameter, in different age groups, and to determine whether there is a prevalent value for each age group.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study with 196 children aged 0 to 15 years. Data were extracted from reports of ultrasound examinations carried out between 2008 and 2015. Children with sonographic diagnosis of appendicitis or other signs of periappendiceal inflammation were excluded.
resultsThe evaluation of the anteroposterior measurement of the cecal appendix revealed a mean diameter of 4.14mm (standard deviation: 0.93mm; 95%CI: 3.86-4.14). Cecal appendix diameter did not differ significant between age groups.
conclusionEvaluation of the anteroposterior diameter of the cecal appendix in centimeters in a sample of 196 children aged 0 to15 years revealed a mean diameter of 4.14mm (standard deviation, 0.93mm. There were no significant differences in cecal appendix diameter following stratification by age. Results indicate a single value can be adopted for mean cecal appendix diameter in pediatric populations.
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.