MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415082338 · doi:10.7759/cureus.94370

Patterns of Head CT Utilization in Emergency Department Patients With Minor Head Injury: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4415082338 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Satyasuna Kafle, Roshan Shrestha, Dipesh Karki, Saif Abdulsattar, Hassan Imtiaz, Muhammad Rizwan Umer, Havil Stephen Alexander Bakka

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency departmentHead injuryExcellenceGold standard (test)Cochrane LibraryMEDLINEPresentation (obstetrics)Systematic reviewComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minor head injury (MHI) is a frequent presentation to emergency departments (EDs), and while most patients recover uneventfully, a small proportion develop clinically important traumatic brain injury (ciTBI). Computed tomography (CT) is the diagnostic gold standard for detecting intracranial pathology, but its widespread use contributes to unnecessary radiation exposure, higher costs, and ED crowding. To optimize utilization, several clinical decision rules, including the Canadian CT Head Rule, New Orleans Criteria, National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study II (NEXUS-II), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines, have been developed to balance sensitivity for ciTBI with the need to limit avoidable scans. This systematic review, conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library up to August 2025. Of the 96 records screened, five studies with over 44,000 patients met the inclusion criteria. The findings indicate that although decision rules demonstrate high sensitivity and strong potential to reduce unnecessary imaging, variability in adherence leads to both overuse and underuse of CT. Greater integration of validated rules into clinical workflows and decision-support systems is needed to enhance patient safety, reduce costs, and improve efficiency in the management of MHI.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.008
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances→French-language works237,207→