ArticleMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2022
The Assessment of the Rationale for Urgent Head CT-Comparative Analysis of Referrals and Results of Examinations without and with Contrast Enhancement.
Article in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study analyzes the correlation between the indications and results of head CT examinations in search of evidence of the excessive use of this diagnostic method. In total, 1160 referrals for urgent head CT were analyzed retrospectively, including the following parameters: patients' sex and age, type of scan (C-, C+, angio-CT), description of symptoms and presence of diagnostic target. Pathologies identified by the radiologist were assigned to four classes, regarding the severity of diagnosed conditions. The analysis of the CT results has shown that over half (55.22%) of the examinations revealed no deviations or showed chronic, asymptomatic lesions. As many as 73.71% referrals constituted group 0 in terms of the lack of a diagnostic target of a specific pathology. The presence of specific clinical targeting in a referral correlated significantly with a higher frequency of acute diagnosis. Contrast-enhanced follow-up examinations allowed the unequivocal classification of patients into extreme classes (I or IV) and accurate identification of patients requiring urgent or chronic treatment. Excessive use of diagnostic imaging is harmful, not only to patients, who often are unnecessarily exposed to radiation, but also to the quality of healthcare, since it increases the costs and radiologists' workload.
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.