ArticleEmergency radiology2026
Appropriateness of imaging requests for pediatric traumatic brain injury in the emergency department: a retrospective cross-sectional study.
Article in Emergency 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) accounts for a significant proportion of emergency department (ED) visits, with an estimated global incidence of up to 200 cases per 100,000 children each year. Despite clinical guidelines, imaging is often overused, particularly in mild cases, exposing children to unnecessary radiation. In Latin America, evidence regarding the appropriateness of imaging requests (AIR) and their diagnostic value remains scarce.
objectiveTo assess the association between the AIR and final radiologic findings in traumatic brain injury, and to explore predictors through multivariable analysis.
methodsThis retrospective, multicentric, cross-sectional study included 719 neuroimaging studies (CT and skull radiography -SR-) performed in 2023 at two high-complexity private hospitals in Santiago, Chile. AIR was classified using the ACR Appropriateness Criteria® and the PECARN algorithm. Confirmatory findings included hemorrhages, skull fractures, and other traumatic lesions. Exploratory multivariable models were applied to evaluate factors associated with final diagnosis.
resultsOnly 2.9% of imaging requests were deemed appropriate. Among CTs (n = 317), the adjusted probability of a confirmatory result was 48.0% (95% CI: 26.3-69.8) for appropriate requests versus 7.0% (95% CI: 4.1-9.9) for inappropriate ones, an absolute difference of 41 percentage points (p < 0.01). Inappropriate requests were associated with a 13-fold lower relative probability of identifying clinically relevant findings. All SRs were considered inappropriate and had a diagnostic yield of only 1%.
conclusionA significant gap exists between clinical practice and guideline-based imaging for pediatric TBI in Chile. Reinforcing validated decision tools may help optimize imaging use and minimize unnecessary radiation exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41504833What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.