ArticleInsights into imaging2025
On-call or not on-call, what difference does it make in paediatric radiology?
Article in Insights into imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated detection of pediatric forearm fractures in X-ray images using deep learning.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Impact of reader experience on the time-saving potential of a novel computer-aided tool for Ann Arbor staging of pediatric hodgkin lymphoma.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- Why is the International Pediatric Radiology Congress important for the health and well-being of the subspecialty of pediatric radiology?Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThere is an ever-increasing demand for out-of-hours expert opinion in paediatric radiology, which cannot be delivered in all hospitals. This study was designed to ascertain whether paediatricians, paediatric surgeons and radiologists are satisfied with the current situation; and to investigate the extent to which diagnostic errors are made while on-call with either residents, general or paediatric radiologists reporting on paediatric examinations.
methodsTwo surveys were compiled and dispatched. The first, is to paediatricians, paediatric surgeons and paediatric radiologists questioning their satisfaction with the current on-call paediatric radiology services in their hospitals. The second, is to paediatric radiologists inviting them to retrospectively score the accuracy of the reporting on consecutive paediatric radiology examinations performed during on-call hours in their hospitals.
resultsThe first survey revealed that 40/49 (82%) paediatric physicians were satisfied with the paediatric radiology service during office hours, decreasing to 33% during on-call hours. In the second survey, a total of 464 on-call paediatric radiology examinations were analysed, demonstrating 20.2% misdiagnoses. General radiologists had more misdiagnoses and were slower in providing a report than residents.
conclusionThe current service with a lack of on-call paediatric radiologists, is associated with increased misdiagnoses and dissatisfaction among physicians and requires improvement. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study shows that it may be a struggle to organise the 24-h availability of an expert paediatric radiologist, yet this might avoid 20% of misdiagnoses, half of which have direct clinical consequences. KEY POINTS: The current organisation of paediatric radiology on-call rotas is unsatisfactory for many clinicians. A substantial amount of on-call paediatric radiology reports contain misdiagnoses, and these may have significant clinical consequences. Hospitals should reconfigure out-of-hours paediatric radiology covers.
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.