Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39215333›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2024

Evaluation of treatment planning discrepancies: CT versus plain radiographic findings in patients with foot and ankle trauma.

Seyed Hadi Kalantar, Nima Bagheri, Nesa Milan, Sare Moslemi Mehni, Iman Menbari Oskouie, Tina Alinia, Nazanin Rahimdoost

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Accuracy of Key Sonographic Markers for Juxta-Articular Fractures: A Prospective Study Using Explainable Machine Learning.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Seyed Hadi KalantarDepartment of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nima BagheriDepartment of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nesa MilanDepartment of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Sare Moslemi MehniDepartment of Radiology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Iman Menbari OskouieUrology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Tina AliniaDepartment of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nazanin RahimdoostCenter for Orthopedic Trans-Disciplinary Applied Research, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Nazanin_rahimdoost@yahoo.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the findings of plain radiography and computed tomography (CT) of foot and ankle in patients submitted to the emergency department with high-energy foot and ankle trauma, to demonstrate if missing fractures on plain radiographs will significantly alter the treatment plan considered for each patient based on the findings of each imaging modality. We retrospectively observed standard radiological foot and ankle x-rays and CT scans in patients who presented to our center from April 2019 to June 2020 with a history of foot and ankle trauma with either loss of consciousness, a history of high-energy trauma, or clinical presentation disproportionate to plain radiographic findings. We investigated the number of fractures of each bone detected on plain radiographs and CT scans and the treatments based on each modality's findings in patients admitted to our center. Sixty-five out of 163 (39.87%) included in our study had at least one missed fracture on plain radiography that was detected on CT. Thirty-one (19%) patients had normal radiography despite actually having fractures. In 38 (23.31%) patients CT changed the treatment plan decided by our surgeons (P < 0.001). The two imaging modalities had a moderate agreement for detecting foot and ankle fractures overall (κ = 0.432). The failure to detect fractures in patients with high-energy trauma can significantly impact treatment effectiveness. Integrating CT scans into the diagnostic process can lead to changes in treatment planning and ultimately improve patient outcomes. LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE: IV.

Indexed as

Ankle InjuriesFoot InjuriesFractures, BoneTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleFootHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Care PlanningRadiographyRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultComputed tomographyDiagnostic accuracyFoot and ankle traumaPlain radiographyTreatment planning

Identifiers

PMID39215333
PMCPMC11365251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.