ArticleEmergency radiology2025
Evaluating the utility of chest x-rays for non-traumatic chest pain in Australia- a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to quantify the proportion of chest x-rays (CXRs) for non-traumatic chest pain (NTCP) in the emergency department (ED) that were abnormal and assess the clinical significance of these abnormalities. We also aimed to explore the variables associated with abnormal and clinically significant abnormal CXRs, to predict a population where CXRs can be safely avoided.
methodsA single center retrospective cohort study was conducted including all adult patients presenting to a single ED with NTCP between 01 Jan 2022 and 31 Dec 2022. We categorized the CXRs into abnormal, or normal as reported by a radiologist. Abnormalities were categorized to be clinically significant based on potential or actual changes in patient management. The association of patient demographics, presenting vital signs, and clinical characteristics with clinically significant abnormalities were explored using multivariable logistic regression analysis.
resultsThere were 3,419 eligible patient encounters included for analysis. Of these, 746 (21.8%; 95%CI: 20.4-23.2%) CXRs had at least one abnormality detected. There were 218 (6.4%; 95%CI: 6.1-7.9%) CXRs deemed to have clinically significant abnormalities. Age categories of 50-64 years (aOR 1.64; 95%CI 1.04-2.60), and age > 64 years (aOR 2.32; 95%CI: 1.51-3.57), history of congestive heart failure (CHF) (aOR 1.86; 95%CI: 1.08-3.21), smoking (aOR 1.27; 95%CI: 1.04-1.57), hemoptysis (aOR 6.69; 95%CI: 1.92-23.33), diminished lung sounds (aOR 4.87; 95%CI:2.95-8.05), rales (aOR 4.49; 95%CI: 2.82-7.15), and abnormal oxygen saturations (aOR 1.98; 95%CI: 1.40-2.79) were associated with clinically significant abnormalities on CXRs. In the absence of these variables, 1.4% (95%CI: 0.6-2.6%) of CXRs were abnormal with clinical significance.
conclusionsCXRs have a relatively high yield of abnormalities among patients with NTCP. However, some CXRs could be safely avoided in the absence of variables associated with clinically significant abnormalities. Further validation of these clinical characteristics is required before translation to clinical practice.
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.