ArticlePediatric radiology2023
Neuroimaging for mild traumatic brain injury in children: cross-sectional study using national claims data.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidences of Concussion in the United States: A Review of Health Insurance Claims.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Abnormal brain morphology and morphological brain network in adults with acute mild traumatic brain injury.Neuroreport · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Scandinavian guidelines for minor and moderate head trauma in children: a prospective, pragmatic, validation study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundCurrent guidelines recommend healthcare professionals avoid routine use of neuroimaging for diagnosing mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI).
objectiveThis study aimed to examine current use of CT and MRI among children and young adult patients with mTBI and factors that increase likelihood of neuroimaging in this population. MATERIALS AND
methodsData were analyzed using the 2019 MarketScan commercial claims and encounters database for the commercially insured population for both inpatient and outpatient claims. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models for patients ≤24 years of age who received an ICD-10-CM code indicative of a possible mTBI were analyzed.
resultsNeuroimaging was performed in 16.9% (CT; 95% CI=16.7-17.1) and 0.9% (MRI; 95% CI=0.8-0.9) of mTBI outpatient visits (including emergency department visits) among children (≤18 years old). Neuroimaging was performed in a higher percentage of outpatient visits for patients 19-24 years old (CT=47.1% [95% CI=46.5-47.6] and MRI=1.7% [95% CI=1.5-1.8]), and children aged 15-18 years old (CT=20.9% [95% CI=20.5-21.2] and MRI=1.4% [95% CI=1.3-1.5]). Outpatient visits for males were 1.22 (95% CI=1.10-1.25) times more likely to include CT compared to females, while there were no differences by sex for MRI or among inpatient stays. Urban residents, as compared to rural, were less likely to get CT in outpatient settings (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.55, 95% CI=0.53-0.57). Rural residents demonstrated a larger proportion of inpatient admissions that had a CT.
conclusionsDespite recommendations to avoid routine use of neuroimaging for mTBI, neuroimaging remained common practice in 2019.
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.