ArticleCureus2025
The Utility of Pan-Scan Imaging in Older Patients After Ground-Level Falls: A Comparative Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study assessed pan-scan versus selective CT (SCT) for ground-level falls in older adults.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of adults aged 65+ who sustained a ground-level fall. Patients underwent SCT (brain, cervical spine, plus one additional CT scan) or pan-scan (brain, cervical/thoracic/lumbar spine, abdomen/pelvis, and chest).
resultsTwo hundred three patients received SCT (n=105, 51.7%) or pan-scan (n=98, 48.3%). Significantly more consultations based on incidental findings were found in the pan-scan group (P=0.020). Significantly more operative interventions were seen among those who had a pan-scan (n=43, 43.9%) compared with those who had SCT (n=19, 18.1%; p<0.001). Patients who received SCT had a significantly shorter hospital course (average 4.0 days vs 6.0 days; p=0.001), without mortality difference (p=0.168). Multivariable linear regression models predicted that having a pan-scan increased hospital length of stay (R2=0.603).
conclusionsUse of a physical exam as a guide for diagnostic imaging reduces unnecessary imaging without compromising patient outcomes and may reduce hospital length of stay.
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.