Observational studyEuropean radiology2026
Rib fracture diagnosis in suspected abuse: Computed tomography or radiographs (RECEPTOR)? A multicentre diagnostic accuracy observational study.
Observational study in European radiology, 2026. 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of chest CT for rib fractures in live children investigated for suspected physical abuse (SPA), using initial and follow-up chest radiographs (CXRs) as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective 10-year (September 2011-2021) multicentre search was performed for children less than two years of age who received CXRs and chest CT for SPA. Nineteen consultant radiologists independently read the images: Round 1 (initial CXRs only), Round 2 (CTs only) and Round 3 (initial and follow-up CXRs). No reporter performed Round 3 before Round 1 or 2. Radiologists reported the presence of rib fractures, fracture age, fracture location and confidence level. CT diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy) was calculated per patient, per rib and per specific location along the rib arc.
resultsA total of 64 patients (36 boys) with a median age of 2 months were included and assessed by 19 independent consultant radiologists. Patient level analysis: CT sensitivity = 90.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88.2-92.6), specificity = 74.2% (95% CI: 70.2-78.0). Rib level analysis: CT sensitivity = 85.6% (95% CI: 84.1-87.0), specificity = 94.16% (95% CI: 93.8-94.4). Location level analysis: CT sensitivity = 75.7% (95% CI: 74.0-77.4), specificity = 97.09% (95% CI: 96.9-97.2).
conclusionChest CT confers accurate rib fracture detection in live children with SPA, with the potential to replace the current standard of performing six CXRs as part of initial and follow-up imaging for SPA. KEY POINTS: Question What is the diagnostic performance of chest CT in detecting rib fractures in live children with SPA, using CXR as a reference standard? Findings Chest CT showed 90.6% sensitivity and 74.2% specificity for detecting rib fractures on patient-based analysis, with 79.7% sensitivity for posterior rib fractures. Clinical relevance Chest CT accurately detects rib fractures in children investigated for SPA and may serve as an alternative to initial and follow-up CXR, supporting timely clinical assessment and management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41619005What 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.