Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38206917›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2024

Overuse of computed tomography for mild head injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maryam Saran, Morteza Arab-Zozani, Meysam Behzadifar, Mehrdad Gholami, Samad Azari, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, Masoud Behzadifar

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
17.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. A Multi-Centre Study:Saudi medical journal · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Incidental cranial suture closure in pediatric patients: a rigorous evaluation of suture closure timing in the era of high-resolution CT.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Maryam SaranSocial Determinants of Health Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
Morteza Arab-ZozaniSocial Determinants of Health Research Center, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand, Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-7223-6707
Meysam BehzadifarSocial Determinants of Health Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
Mehrdad GholamiDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
Samad AzariHospital Management Research Center, Health Management Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nicola Luigi BragazziHuman Nutrition Unit Department of Food and Drugs, University of Parma Medical School, Parma, Italy.
Masoud BehzadifarSocial Determinants of Health Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-0271-4360
Lorestan University of Medical Sciences · IRBirjand University of Medical Sciences · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComputed tomography (CT) scan is a common imaging technique used to evaluate the severity of a head injury. The overuse of diagnostic interventions in the health system is a growing concern worldwide. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the rate of CT scan overuse in cases of mild head injury.

methodsEligibility criteria: We encompassed observational studies-either designed as cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional investigations-that reported on CT scan overuse rates for mild head injuries. Studies had to be published in peer-reviewed, English-language sources and provide full content access Information sources: Web of Sciences, Scopus, Medline via PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase were searched from inception until April 1, 2023. Studies were included if reporting the overuse of CT scans for mild head injuries using validated criteria. Risk of bias: We used the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool to evaluate the risk bias assessment of included studies. Two independent reviewers evaluated the eligibility of studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality by using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Synthesis of results: Overuse estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate any sources of heterogeneity. Point rate of overuse of CT scans for mild head injuries was the main outcome measured as percentage point estimates with corresponding 95% CIs.

resultsIncluded studies: Of the 913 potentially relevant studies identified, eight studies were selected for the final analysis. Synthesis of results: The pooled rate of CT scan overuse in patients with mild head injury was found to be 27% [95% CI: 16-43; I2 = 99%]. The rate of CT scan overuse in mild head injury cases varied depending on the criteria used. The rate of CT scan overuse was 37% [95% CI: 32-42; I2 = 0%] with the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), 30% [95% CI: 16-49; I2 = 99%] with the Canadian computed tomography head rule, and 10% [95% CI: 8-14; I2 = 0%] with the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network criterion (PERCAN). Based on subgroup analyses, the rate of CT scan overuse in mild head injury cases was observed to be 30% with the Canadian computed tomography head rule criterion, 43% with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence criterion, and 18% with the New Orleans criterion.

conclusionLimitations of evidence: The restricted number of included studies may impact generalizability. High heterogeneity was observed, leading to subgroup analyses based on age, assessment criteria, and study region. Absent data on overuse causes hinders drawing conclusions on contributing factors. Furthermore, this study solely addressed overuse rates, not associated harm or benefits. Interpretation: The overuse of CT scans in mild head injury patients is concerning, as it can result in unnecessary radiation exposure and higher healthcare costs. Clinicians and policymakers should prioritize the implementation of guidelines to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure, healthcare costs, and potential harm to patients.

trial registrationThe study protocol of this review was registered in PROSPERO under the identification code CRD42023416080. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023416080.

Indexed as

Craniocerebral TraumaTomography, X-Ray ComputedCanadaChildCross-Sectional StudiesGlasgow Coma ScaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID38206917
PMCPMC10783716
OpenAlexW4390738242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.