ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2026
Compliance With NICE Guidance for Cervical Spine Trauma Imaging: A Single Centre Retrospective Evaluation.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn 2016 the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published guidance in England recommending computed tomography (CT) as the first line imaging for cervical spine (C-spine) injury in adults. However anecdotal evidence suggests that X-rays are still being performed. The aim of this evaluation was to determine the imaging referral patterns following C-spine trauma and compare with national guidance.
methodsWithin a single English organisation emergency department patient attendance data, X-ray and CT referral criteria and acquisition information for patients ≥ 16 years undergoing imaging of the C-spine was collated from a 12-month period (01.01.23-31.12.23).
resultsThe cohort contained 302 females and 301 males, with a median age of 55 years. According to the clinical information 12.1% (n = 73/603) of the patients had no risk of C-spine injury and therefore should not have required diagnostic imaging. Almost two thirds of patients (n = 395/603; 65.5%) had first line CT imaging consistent with national guidance. Of those where imaging was justified, 135 patients had the incorrect initial diagnostic test (X-ray as opposed to CT) with 26 also having a subsequent CT. The quality of all of the X-rays were reviewed and only 39.5% (n = 73/185) of cases were diagnostic.
conclusionsIn 2023, the organisation was 65.5% compliant with the guidance, with a number of patients referred for unjustified imaging examinations and/or the wrong initial imaging modality. The consequences of this included treatment delays, prolonged immobilisation, over-irradiation and impact upon resources, along with potentially missed pathology due to inconclusive X-rays.
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.