ArticleCureus2022
Are We Following iRefer Guidelines From the Royal College of Radiology When Requesting Abdominal X-rays?
Article in Cureus, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic utility of abdominal radiography in emergency departments with high guideline compliance: a retrospective cohort study.Emergency radiology · 2026Article
- Reducing Inappropriate Abdominal X-ray Requests in a Surgical Admissions Unit: A Quality Improvement Project.Cureus · 2025Article
- Review
- Role of contrast-enhanced serial/spot abdominal X-rays in perioperative follow-up of patients undergoing abdominal surgery: An observational clinical study.World journal of radiology · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Abdominal radiography is one of the most routinely performed radiological investigations in hospitals. It is one of the initial investigations done in hospitals. Numerous studies have shown that abdominal X-rays have low sensitivity in several conditions such as acute abdominal pain. Methodology This study aims to first identify whether the Royal College of Radiology guidelines are being adhered to while requesting abdominal X-rays and, second, to identify the number of unnecessary requests made in the Betsi Cadwaladr health board. This is a retrospective audit of abdominal X-ray request data collected between the 1st and 23rd of August 2022. Data were collected from the electronic radiology record system. iRefer guidelines by the Royal College of Radiology were used as a reference to compare the requests made, and data were then analysed accordingly. Data are reported descriptively using percentages. Data analysis was done using SPSS version 20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results Of the total 242 abdominal X-rays noted, 89.67% of requests were according to the iRefer guidelines while 10.33% of requests were not. A total of 73.14% of cases were suspected to have an intestinal obstruction, and the positivity rate for the same was only 12.39%. Conclusions The majority of the requests followed the guidelines. However, there is an urgent need to develop local guidelines to reduce needless abdominal X-rays.
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.