ReviewCureus2025
Diagnostic Capabilities of MRI and CT in Evaluating Dizziness: A Systematic Review of Acute Cases in the ED.
Review in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dizziness is a common reason for ED visits, posing diagnostic challenges due to its broad range of potential causes, from benign vestibular conditions to critical cerebrovascular events. Although CT scans are often used to quickly assess for intracranial hemorrhage, MRI provides greater accuracy for identifying strokes in the posterior circulation. Differences in imaging practices and uncertainty about the most effective approach highlight the need for a thorough evaluation of these modalities. This narrative systematic review examined the diagnostic performance of MRI and CT in assessing patients presenting with acute dizziness in ED settings, focusing on detection rates and clinical considerations. A comprehensive literature search was conducted, and eight relevant studies were included. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed, and findings were synthesized narratively due to variability in study designs. Overall, MRI showed a higher detection rate for underlying causes of dizziness compared to CT, particularly for posterior circulation strokes. CT was mainly useful for ruling out hemorrhage, while MRI offered superior detection of ischemic events. Using clinical factors such as age, vascular risk, and neurological findings may help prioritize MRI use in patients with higher stroke risk, supporting targeted imaging strategies to improve diagnostic outcomes and resource utilization.
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.