ArticleInsights into imaging2023
CT and MRI imaging in Sweden: retrospective appropriateness analysis of large referral samples.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex differences in inappropriate imaging requests: insights from the Medical Imaging Decision And Support (MIDAS) study.European radiology · 2026Trial
- Variations in general practitioners' referrals to low-value MRI examinations in Norway: A nationwide register-based study.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- A worldwide cross-sectional survey seeks the current global practice patterns on perioperative management in elective shoulder replacement surgery.JSES international · 2026Article
- Aortic dissection incidence, management, and outcomes: national population-based study.The British journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Analysis of the Justification for Spinal Computed Tomography (CT) Scans Performed in Togo.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
- Comparison of CT referral justification using clinical decision support and large language models in a large European cohort.European radiology · 2025Article
- Length of stay in the emergency department and its associated input-, throughput-, and output factors at two hospitals in Sweden.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Image quality assessment in spine surgery: a comparison of intraoperative CBCT and postoperative MDCT.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Can ChatGPT and Gemini justify brain CT referrals? A comparative study with human experts and a custom prediction model.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Insights from a web-based questionnaire: examining diagnostic procedures prior to magnetic resonance imaging.Israel journal of health policy research · 2024Article
- Article
- Inappropriate requests for cranial CT scans in emergency departments increase overuse and reduce test performance.Emergency 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe numbers of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations per capita continue to increase in Sweden and in other parts of Europe. The appropriateness of CT and MRI examinations was audited using established European appropriateness criteria. Alternative modalities were also explored. The results were compared with those of a previous study performed in Sweden.
methodsA semi-automatic retrospective evaluation of referrals from examinations performed in four healthcare regions using the European appropriateness criteria in ESR iGuide was undertaken. The clinical indications from a total of 13,075 referrals were assessed against these criteria. The ESR iGuide was used to identify alternative modalities resulting in a higher degree of appropriateness. A qualitative comparison with re-evaluated results from the previous study was made.
resultsThe appropriateness was higher for MRI examinations than for CT examinations with procedures classed as usually appropriate for 76% and 63% of the examinations, respectively. The degree of appropriateness for CT was higher for referrals from hospitals compared to those from primary care centres. The opposite was found for MRI examinations. The alternative modalities that would result in higher appropriateness included all main imaging modalities. The result for CT did not show improvement compared with the former study.
conclusionsA high proportion of both CT and MRI examinations were inappropriate. The study indicates that 37% of CT examinations and 24% of MRI examinations were inappropriate and that the appropriateness for CT has not improved in the last 15 years. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: A high proportion of CT and MRI examinations in this retrospective study using evidence-based referral guidelines were inappropriate. KEY POINTS: ∙ A high proportion of CT and MRI examinations were inappropriate. ∙ The CT referrals from general practitioners were less appropriate that those from hospital specialists. ∙ The MRI referrals from hospital specialists were less appropriate that those from general practitioners. ∙ Adherence to radiological appropriateness guidelines may improve the appropriateness of conducted examinations.
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.