ReviewEmergency radiology2024
Assessment of discordance between radiologists and emergency physicians of RADIOgraphs among discharged patients in an emergency department: the RADIO-ED study.
Review in Emergency radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Localizing Knee Pain via Explainable Bayesian Generative Models and Counterfactual MRI: Data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Occult fractures in low-energy trauma-A retrospective forensic case series.Emergency radiology · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe possibility to perform standard X-rays is mandatory for all French Emergency Department (ED). Initial interpretation is under the prescriber emergency physician-who continually works under extreme conditions, but a radiologist needs to describe a report as soon as possible. We decided to assess the rate of discordance between emergency physicians and radiologists among discharged patients.
methodsWe performed a monocentric study on an adult ED among discharged patients who had at least one X-ray during their consult. We used an automatic electronic system that classified interpretation as concordant or discordant. We review all discordant interpretation, which were classified as false negative, false positive, or more exam needed.
resultsFor 1 year, 8988 patients had 12,666 X-rays. We found a total of 742 (5.9%) discordant X-rays, but only 277 (2.2%) discordance had a consequence (new consult or exam not initially scheduled). We found some factors associated with discordance such as male sex, or ankle, foot, knee, finger, wrist, ribs, and elbow locations.
conclusionsOn discharged patients, using a systematic second interpretation of X-ray by a radiologist, we found a total of 2.2% discordance that had an impact on the initial care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38253984What 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.