Observational studyAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Introducing AEM-RADS: A novel reporting and data system for abdominal emergencies.
Observational study in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The problem-solving role of the 'wait and repeat CT' approach in the diagnosis and treatment of acute abdomen.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Reporting and Data System (RADS) has proven successful in various medical settings, but a standardized reporting system for abdominal emergencies is lacking. In this study, the Abdominal Emergency Reporting and Data System (AEM-RADS) for urgent findings on abdominal CT scans is introduced to address the need for consistency in emergency radiology.
methodsIn this prospective observational study, conducted over a six-month period, the urgency of abdominal CT scans was assessed using the proposed AEM-RADS scoring system. The committee developed a scale ranging from AEM-RADS 1 (normal) to AEM-RADS 5 (urgent disease). Interobserver agreement between two observers with different experience was evaluated, and robust AEM-RADS reference values were established by radiologists who were not observers. Statistical analysis used mean, standard deviations and Kendall's tau analysis for interobserver agreement.
resultsAmong 2656 patients who underwent CT for abdominal emergencies, the AEM-RADS distribution was 17.50% AEM-RADS 1, 28.57% AEM-RADS 2, 7.22% AEM-RADS 3, 35.61% AEM-RADS 4, and 11.06% AEM-RADS 5. Interobserver agreement was high, especially for urgent and emergent cases (p < 0.0001). Notable discrepancies were observed in AEM-RADS categories 2C-D and 3B-C, emphasizing the influence of radiologists' experience on interpretation. However, the interobserver agreement for both AEM-RADS 2C-D and 3B-C were statistically significant (p < 0.001).
conclusionsAEM-RADS showed promising reliability, particularly in identifying urgent and emergent cases. Despite some inter-observer discrepancies, the system showed potential for standardized emergency workups. AEM-RADS could significantly enhance diagnostic accuracy in abdominal emergencies and provide a structured framework for shared decision-making between clinicians and radiologists.0.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38916616What 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.