ArticleRevista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes2023
Comparison of tomographic reports by radiologists and non-radiologists in trauma and interferences in management in a trauma reference center.
Article in Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of discrepancies in radiological interpretation on forensic report outcomes: A retrospective study.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivediagnostic errors during the interpretation of an imaging test by the physician can lead to increased mortality and length of hospital stay for patients. The rate of divergence in the report given by a radiologist and an Emergency Physicians (EP) can reach over 20%. The objective of this study was to compare the unofficial tomographic reports issued by EP with the official reports issued by radiologists.
methodsa cross-sectional study, in which interpretations of the exams (documented in the medical records by the EP) of all patients undergoing computed tomography (CT) of the chest, abdomen or pelvis performed in the emergency room, at an interval of 8 months, were evaluated. These data were compared with the official reports of the radiologist (gold standard).
results508 patients were included. The divergence between EP and the radiologist occurred in 27% of the cases. The most common type of divergence was the one not described by the EP, but described by the radiologist. The chance of having divergence in a case of multiple trauma is 4.93 times greater in relation to the case of only blunt trauma in one segment. A statistically relevant difference was also found in the length of stay of patients who had different interpretations of the CT scans.
conclusionthe study found a relatively high divergence rate between the EP report and the official radiologist report. However, less than 4% of these were considered to be clinically relevant, indicating the ability of the EP to interpret it satisfactorily.
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.