ArticleScientific reports2024
Development and validation of a new scoring system to discriminate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Appendicolith detection in dual-energy CT of adult acute appendicitis: comparing portovenous phase and virtual noncontrast with true noncontrast images.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Association of Sex, Age, and Inflammatory Cell Counts with Complicated Acute Appendicitis.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2026Article
- Low-keV virtual monoenergetic images with rapid kilovoltage-switching DECT for differentiating complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis in adults.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- External Validation of Adult Prediction Models for Complicated Appendicitis After Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography: A Single-Centre Study.ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A scoring system to discriminate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis is beneficial to determine the optimal treatment for acute appendicitis. We developed a scoring system to discriminate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and assessed the clinical usefulness of the scoring system using external validation. A total of 299 patients with acute appendicitis were retrospectively reviewed. One hundred and ninety-nine patients were assigned to the model development group, while the other 100 patients were assigned to an external validation group. A scoring system for complicated appendicitis was created using a final multivariate logistic regression model with six independent predictors. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the scoring system was 0.882 (95% confidence interval: 0.835-0.929). The cutoff point of the scoring system was 12, and the sensitivity and specificity were 82.9% and 86.2%, respectively. In the external validation group, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the scoring system was 0.868 (95% confidence interval 0.794-0.942), and there was no significant difference between the groups in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (P = 0.750). Our newly developed scoring system may contribute to prompt determination of the optimal treatment for acute appendicitis.
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.