SynthesisPloS one2024
Overuse of computed tomography for mild head injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
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.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for traumatic intracranial hemorrhage in mild traumatic brain injury patients at the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Prospective blinded interim evaluation of a portable radiofrequency device TES HT to support triage in emergency department patients with mild head trauma or acute neurological symptoms.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Trial
- Is a Repeat Head CT Scan Necessary After an Initial Negative Scan in Head Trauma Patients on DOAC Therapy in the Emergency Department?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- CT sinus imaging utilization in Norway: trends over time and variation by region, age, and sex.Research in health services & regions · 2026Article
- Routine repeat computed tomography of the head in patients with mild traumatic brain injury: is it really necessary?Emergency radiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-5 for CT Imaging in Canadian CT Head Rule-Positive Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Pilot Study.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Consensus statements for the diagnosis of mild traumatic brain injury and clinical integration of blood-based biomarkers in the Asia-Pacific region: a modified Delphi study.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- GFAP and UCH-L1 for Ruling out Intracranial Lesions After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The Value of Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR) in Identifying Intracranial Injury in Patients with Mild Head Trauma: A Prospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A Multi-Centre Study:Saudi medical journal · 2026Article
- Uncovering the Role of Thrombospodin-1 and Occludin as Potential Prognostic and Diagnostic Biomarkers in Traumatic Brain Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- Overuse of head CT scans in non-traumatic paediatric cases in the West Bank, Palestine: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Trends in CT use in an emergency department in Western Australia: 2015-2022.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- A head-to-head comparison of S100B and GFAP/UCH-L1 for detection of traumatic intracranial lesions in a Scandinavian trauma cohort.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Outcomes after Traumatic Brain Injury with and Without Computed Tomography.Journal of neurotrauma · 2025Article
- Overuse of medical imaging and effects of payer-provider integration: quasi-experimental evidence from Finland.Health economics review · 2025Article
- Current status and solutions for the overuse of emergency CT in pediatric patients with abdominal pain.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
- Understanding the factors that influence CT utilization for mild traumatic brain injury in a low resource setting - a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2024Article
- Chronic immunosuppression across 12 months and high ability of acute and subacute CNS-injury biomarker concentrations to identify individuals with complicated mTBI on acute CT and MRI.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.