ArticlePloS one2025
Evaluation of diagnostic measurements in patients with non-specific complaints: A secondary analysis after implementation of a care-pathway in the emergency department.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOlder patients presenting with nonspecific complaints (NSC) in the Emergency Department (ED) pose diagnostic challenges. The lack of clear symptoms leads to high misdiagnosis rates, extended hospital stays, and functional impairment. However, limited research exists on diagnostic test utilization for this population.
methodsA secondary analysis was conducted on data from 399 older patients (aged 70+) at two hospitals in the Netherlands. These patients presented with NSC and were assessed using a standardized care-pathway that included diagnostic tests such as blood tests, ECGs, chest X-rays, and bladder ultrasounds. Data from a control group (164 patients) and an intervention group (235 patients) were compared, focusing on adherence to the diagnostic pathway, test frequency, and clinical outcomes.
resultsThe intervention group showed significantly greater use of several diagnostic tests compared to the control group, specifically calcium, TSH, glucose, ALAT, ECGs, chest X-rays, and bladder ultrasounds. Notably, abnormal findings were relatively low across tests, particularly for ALAT, TSH and calcium. Urinalysis, chest X-rays and ECGs were used more frequently and identified clinically significant findings. Head CT scans were used more frequently in the intervention group, though not statistically significant.
conclusionWe recommend a standardized laboratory work-up for patients presenting with NSC. There is no justification for the routine use of ALAT, TSH and calcium measurements. We also recommend to incorporate bladder scans into routine care, and continuing the standardized use of ECGs, chest X-rays and urinalysis. Head CT scans, on the other hand, should be based on individualized clinical decisions. Trial number: Dutch Trial register, number NL8960.
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.