ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Validation of Modified STONE Score in Patients Presenting to Emergency Department with Flank Pain in a Tertiary Care Centre in South Kerala.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ureteric calculi are a prevalent cause of acute flank pain in emergency departments (EDs). While non-contrast computed tomography (CT) is the diagnostic gold standard, its associated radiation exposure necessitates the development of accurate clinical prediction tools to stratify patients and optimize imaging utilization. Methods: This prospective, observational, cross-sectional study was conducted over 12 months. We enrolled 344 adult patients presenting with unilateral or bilateral flank pain. The modified STONE score (MSS), comprising five variables (male sex, pain duration <6 h, hematuria, prior stone history, and C-reactive protein <0.5 mg/dL), was calculated for each patient. All patients subsequently underwent a non-contrast CT scan, which served as the reference standard. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis, determining the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: The mean age of participants was 47 ± 16 years, and 62% were male. Ureteric stones were confirmed by CT in 292 patients (84.9%). The MSS demonstrated excellent discriminative ability with an AUC of 0.956 (95% CI: 0.928-0.984). At an optimal cut-off score of ≥8, the sensitivity was 90.2% and specificity was 85.4% (PPV: 98.5%, NPV: 66.7%). At a cut-off of ≥7, specificity increased to 97.4% (PPV: 97.8%), though sensitivity decreased to 68.3%. The proportion of patients with ureteric stones increased significantly across low (25%), medium (66%), and high (99.6%) risk categories ( Conclusion: The MSS is a highly accurate and reliable clinical tool for predicting ureteric calculi in the ED setting. Its use can effectively stratify patients into risk categories, potentially reducing unnecessary CT scans while ensuring timely diagnosis for high-risk individuals.
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.