ReviewInternational journal of emergency medicine2026
Overuse of imaging for pulmonary embolism in emergency departments: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in International journal of emergency medicine, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening condition whose diagnosis can be challenging. Despite clinical decision rules (CDRs) like the PERC rule and Wells’ score, concerns over missed diagnoses contribute to the overuse of computed tomography angiography (CTA) and ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) scans. This study estimates the proportion of potentially avoidable imaging performed in emergency departments (EDs) for adult patients with suspected PE.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase.com, CochraneLibrary.com, and Web of Science Core Collection (8 indexes), complemented by manual searches from inception to July 2025. Studies were included if they reported the proportion of CTA or V/Q scans performed despite a CDR not recommending imaging. Two independent reviewers selected the articles and extracted the data; a third reviewer resolved any disagreements. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2, and a meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model, including subgroup and sensitivity analyses based on continents, CDR type, and whether the subjective component of the CDR was assessed by the treating physician.
resultsThirty-four studies were included. The pooled proportion (95% confidence interval) of potentially avoidable imaging was estimated at 22% (17–28), with high heterogeneity (I² = 99.4%). Across CDRs supported by the current literature, the PERC rule yielded the lowest pooled proportion (10% [7–14]), while the YEARS criteria had the highest (42% [11–81]). Sensitivity analyses restricted to studies with low risk of bias (n = 7) and low applicability concerns (n = 15) showed slightly higher pooled proportions of potentially avoidable imaging (27% and 28%, respectively).
conclusionOptimizing CDR adherence in EDs could substantially reduce unnecessary imaging for PE, lowering costs and minimizing environmental impact. This review highlights the benefits of stricter CDR implementation in routine PE assessment.
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.