ArticleCureus2024
The Diagnostic Value of Brain CT Scans in Evaluating Dizziness in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brain computed tomography (CT) findings in patients with vertigo and without focal neurological abnormalities in the emergency department of a tertiary center in Saudi Arabia: a retrospective study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Capabilities of MRI and CT in Evaluating Dizziness: A Systematic Review of Acute Cases in the ED.Cureus · 2025Review
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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDizziness is a common presenting complaint to emergency departments (ED) worldwide, with causes ranging from benign to life-threatening incidents. Computerized tomography (CT) of the brain remains a common diagnostic tool used by emergency physicians; however, it appears to be of low diagnostic value, especially in patients with normal neurological assessment while carrying multiple negative implications on both the patients and the healthcare systems. Our study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of brain CT scans in assessing patients presenting to the ED with acute dizziness. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective review of medical records of patients presenting with complaints of dizziness to the ED at Salmaniya Medical Complex (SMC) who underwent a brain CT scan from January to June 2023. Collected data included patients' demographic information, presenting complaints, and CT scan results. A multivariable analysis of factors associated with positive CT scans was performed.
resultsA total of 481 participants were enrolled in the study, representing diverse age groups as follows: 18-30 years (12.3%), 31-40 years (15.8%), 41-50 years (17.7%), 51-60 years (22.0%), and those aged over 60 years (32.2%). Among the participants, 56.3% identified as male and 43.7% as female. In terms of head trauma history, 7.1% of participants reported such incidents, while the majority (92.9%) had no history of head trauma. Exploring comorbidities, 43.5% of participants had at least one associated medical condition. Among the 481 study participants, brain CT scans revealed that the majority (93.1%) exhibited unremarkable results. The remaining cases exhibited acute events, including 5.4% with infarcts, 1.1% with hemorrhages, and 0.4% with space-occupying lesions.
conclusionThis study provides evidence of the limited value of brain CT scans in dizzy patients with unremarkable clinical examinations. As for clinicians, it can serve as a steppingstone toward the formulation of a policy and a set of guidelines for requesting brain CT scans in patients presenting to the ED with dizziness. Future studies are suggested to provide more insights into the cost-effectiveness and utility of head CT scans in providing valuable findings.
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.