ArticleAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2026
Clinical Features, CT Imaging Decisions and Yield by Age in Adults With Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department.
Article in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2026. 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.
- Clinical Features, CT Imaging Decisions and Yield by Age in Adults With Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
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
Abstract
objectivesOlder adults with abdominal pain present diagnostic uncertainty due to less informative histories/exams, broader etiologies, and higher morbidity. Whether ED imaging decisions are calibrated to this risk is unclear. The objective of this study was to compare age-stratified clinical features, CT utilization, and CT diagnostic yield, and to assess how history/physical and clinician pretest suspicion relate to adverse outcomes.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort analysis of data from a prospective cohort collected from March 2016-January 2017 at a single community teaching hospital emergency department in southwest Baltimore. We analyzed 1169 visits of adults presenting with nontraumatic abdominal pain including 229 (19.6%) aged ≥ 60 years. Patients < 18 years were excluded. Age groups were 18-39, 40-59, ≥ 60 years. Outcomes were CT ordering, acute actionable CT findings, admission, surgery, and a composite of adverse outcomes (any actionable CT finding, admission, surgery, or Emergency General Surgical diagnosis). History and physical examination operating characteristics (e.g., sensitivity/specificity of tenderness, rebound) were also calculated.
resultsOf 1169 visits, 19.6% were aged ≥ 60 years. CT ordering increased with age (41.7%, 66.2%, 70.7% for 18-39, 40-59, ≥ 60; p < 0.001), as did CT yield (18.4%, 31.2%, 37.7%; p < 0.001). Admissions (12.1%, 28.0%, 37.6%) and surgeries (4.6%, 9.0%, 10.6%) also rose with age. Clinician pretest suspicion was similar across age groups. Abdominal tenderness was less sensitive for adverse outcomes in older adults (sensitivity 0.58 in ≥ 60 vs. 0.73 in 18-39 and 0.73 in 40-59), while rebound tenderness was highly specific across ages (specificity 0.98, 0.96, 0.98). The number of potential diagnoses to consider rose with age.
conclusionIn this cohort, CT use and positivity increased with age and key exam findings (e.g., tenderness) being less informative in older adults, despite similar reported clinician pretest suspicion. These results support age-aware imaging decisions and motivate reframing ED abdominal pain as a geriatric-specific chief complaint.
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.