ArticleEmergency radiology2023
Radiologic blind spots in hip and pelvic radiographs.
Article in Emergency radiology, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-based Hip Fracture Classification from Pelvic X-ray Images Using a Hybrid PEFT-ViT and XGBoost Model.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of our study was to identify the locations at which hip and pelvic fractures are commonly missed on radiographs.
methodsA retrospective study was performed at four non-Level 1 trauma center emergency departments. IRB approval was obtained. All emergency department hip or pelvic radiographs with subsequent CT performed within 48 h were identified from 2017 to 2022. Reports for each radiograph and CT were scored for the presence or the absence of fracture in the following locations: ilium, sacrum, superior pubic ramus, inferior pubic ramus, pubis, acetabulum, subcapital femoral, femoral neck, greater trochanter, lesser trochanter, intertrochanteric, and subtrochanteric. The CT report was used as the gold standard. The false-negative radiography cases were reviewed on a PACS workstation to determine whether the case had an "unexpected miss" of a fracture, a subtle fracture, radiographically occult fracture, or exam was limited by artifact. The percentage of missed fractures at each location was calculated.
resultsNine hundred seventy-five radiography cases with subsequent CT were identified. One hundred forty-six cases did not meet entry criteria; therefore, 829 cases were analyzed further. Seventy-four percent of patients were female with age of 74 ± 16 (mean ± standard deviation) years (range 1-103). Three hundred fifty-two cases had at least one fracture, and many cases had multiple fractures. There were 68 false-negative cases. The most commonly missed fractures by percentage were pubis, ilium, and greater trochanter. The most common unexpectedly missed fractures were greater trochanter and femoral subcapital.
conclusionA careful systematic evaluation of hip and pelvic radiographs, with particular attention to the pubis, ilium, greater trochanter, and subcapital region, may improve radiographic fracture detection and decrease delays in diagnosis.
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.