ArticlePloS one2025
A case-control study evaluating CT signs of xiphoid process associated with xiphodynia.
Article in PloS one, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study assessed whether CT signs of the xiphoid process, such as the xiphisternal angle and soft tissue compression, are useful for diagnosing xiphodynia. Conducted as a case-control study within a cohort, it involved 1560 participants who visited a small urban hospital in Japan for chest or abdominal pain between January 2021 and September 2023. From this group, patients who underwent CT scans that included the xiphoid process were selected. The study group consisted of nine individuals diagnosed with xiphodynia, while the control group included 321 individuals diagnosed with other causes of pain. No significant differences were found in the xiphisternal angle, soft tissue compression, or xiphoid tip features between the groups. However, in about 70% of cases, the xiphoid process curved forward and then backward. These findings suggest that the xiphisternal angle is not a useful marker for diagnosing xiphodynia, and that the curvature of the xiphoid process is common regardless of the condition.
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.