ReviewInfection & chemotherapy2025
The Usefulness and Limitations of Radiologic Findings for Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: A Call for Antimicrobial Stewardship.
Review in Infection & chemotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Radiological evaluation is pivotal in diagnosing infectious diseases, but its inherent limitations can lead to diagnostic uncertainty and inappropriate antibiotic use, exacerbating the global challenge of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). This review examines the utility and constraints of imaging studies-computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and ultrasonography (US)-in common infectious diseases, including pneumonia, acute pyelonephritis (APN), infectious colitis, and skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI). For pneumonia, CT and lung US offer higher sensitivity than chest X-rays, but distinguishing between bacterial and viral pathogens remains challenging. In APN, contrast-enhanced CT is the standard, but routine imaging is not recommended for uncomplicated cases. CT findings in infectious colitis are often nonspecific, necessitating a comprehensive clinical assessment. For SSTIs, particularly in differentiating necrotizing fasciitis, MRI and CT demonstrate high negative predictive value, but positive findings require careful clinical correlation. Furthermore, inter-reader variability exists in interpreting subtle imaging findings. This review highlights the gap between radiological findings and definitive diagnoses, underscoring that imaging is a powerful adjunct but cannot replace comprehensive clinical judgment. A multidisciplinary approach integrating clinical data with imaging findings is essential for accurate diagnosis, responsible antimicrobial stewardship, and effective patient management in the era of AMR.
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.