Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR Awards, New Junior Editors, and more. Read the latest AJNR updates

LetterLetter

The Concept of “Number Needed to Image”

S. Haller
American Journal of Neuroradiology October 2017, 38 (10) E79-E80; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5276
S. Haller
aAffidea Centre de Diagnostic Radiologique de Carouge CDRC Geneva, Switzerland
bDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Uppsala University Uppsala, Sweden
cDepartment of Neuroradiology University Hospital Freiburg Freiburg, Germany
dFaculty of Medicine University of Geneva Geneva, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for S. Haller
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

In medicine, it is a common reaction for referring physicians to ask for the less expensive imaging technique if the a priori suspicion of finding abnormalities is low. For example, in a case with a mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) and low suspicion of finding trauma-related brain abnormalities, the referring physician oftentimes asks for the cheaper, yet less sensitive, CT rather than the more expensive, but also more sensitive, MR imaging to detect, for example, diffuse axonal injuries.1 This reaction is intuitively understandable, notably in times of increasing economic pressure.

However, when considering the situation in more depth, this reaction might be questionable. If a test with a low sensitivity is performed in the setting of a low clinical suspicion (ie, a low pretest probability), this will result in a high proportion of false-negative cases.

From the perspective of optimal patient care, a test with a low sensitivity in the setting of a low pretest probability is not suited to rule out pathology because of the high likelihood of false-negative results.

From the perspective of cost effectiveness, the less expensive yet less sensitive test will result in a high proportion of false-negative examinations. Consequently, many imaging tests must be performed to have 1 positive imaging finding. The accumulated cost for 1 positive imaging test might therefore be high despite the relative low cost of each individual imaging test. In contrast, a more expensive yet more sensitive imaging test will have fewer false-negative cases; consequently, fewer cases are needed to have 1 positive imaging finding. The resulting accumulating cost for 1 positive test might therefore be lower compared with a less expensive yet less sensitive test. This concept might be called “number needed to image” (NNI [ie, the number of imaging examinations needed to have 1 positive imaging test]).

Moreover, there are additional indirect costs that should be considered. A more expensive and more sensitive test might avoid repeated false-negative imaging and repetitive medical consultations for the patient. The earlier and more specific diagnosis might allow for earlier treatment and, consequently, faster and earlier recovery.

In fact, to have a cost-effective imaging assessment, physicians should ask for the less expensive and less sensitive imaging test in the setting of a high clinical suspicion of abnormal findings. In this setting, the less sensitive test might be very cost-efficient and, at the same time, will result in only a low rate of false-negative imaging results.

In medicine, the equivalent concept of number needed to treat (NNT) is well established.2,3 Physicians treat patients (eg, with antiaggregation or antihypertensive medication to prevent stroke) knowing that only 1 of n patients will actually benefit from the treatment. For example, in patients with relatively nonsevere hypertension (diastolic blood pressure, 90–110 mm Hg), the NNT to prevent 1 stroke is 118, whereas this number is 29 in patients with more severe hypertension (diastolic blood pressure >115 mm Hg).4 This creates not only a cost related to the medication, which is oftentimes prescribed for years or even decades, but also medication-related side effects.

Concerning imaging, the corresponding concept of NNI is not yet well established. If, in the current example of MTBI, only 1 of 29 MR imagings would demonstrate subtle posttraumatic findings not visible on CT, this would probably generally be considered as too expensive to justify imaging, though MR imaging has no relevant side effects in contrast to the medical treatment discussed above. Moreover, considering the additional effect on associated costs, such as medicolegal and insurance-related costs, imaging would probably still be highly cost-efficient even if a substantial number of cases have negative MR imaging results.

This principle of NNI applies not only to MTBI. Other examples might be cervical spine radiography instead of CT or MR imaging for low impact cervical spine trauma, or wrist radiography instead of CT or MR imaging for low suspicion of scaphoid fracture, etc.

In conclusion, it is an intuitively understandable reaction to ask for a less expensive and less sensitive imaging test in the setting of a low clinical suspicion of finding abnormalities. However, this intuitive reaction might be neither suitable to reliably rule out pathology nor cost-efficient. The concept of NNI should be further developed to define how many negative imaging tests can be allowed for 1 positive finding, both from the perspective of optimal patient care as well as from the perspective of cost-effective imaging.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Provenzale JM
    . Imaging of traumatic brain injury: a review of the recent medical literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:16–19 doi:10.2214/AJR.09.3687 pmid:20028899
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Laupacis A,
    2. Sackett DL,
    3. Roberts RS
    . An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. N Engl J Med 1988;318:1728–33 doi:10.1056/NEJM198806303182605 pmid:3374545
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Nuovo J,
    2. Melnikow J,
    3. Chang D
    . Reporting number needed to treat and absolute risk reduction in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2002;287:2813–14 doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2813 pmid:12038920
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Kaplan RC
    . Treatment of hypertension to prevent stroke: translating evidence into clinical practice. J Clin Hypertens 2001;3:153–56 doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2001.00447.x pmid:11416700
    CrossRefPubMed
  • © 2017 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 38 (10)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 38, Issue 10
1 Oct 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Concept of “Number Needed to Image”
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
S. Haller
The Concept of “Number Needed to Image”
American Journal of Neuroradiology Oct 2017, 38 (10) E79-E80; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5276

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
The Concept of “Number Needed to Image”
S. Haller
American Journal of Neuroradiology Oct 2017, 38 (10) E79-E80; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5276
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • The Diagnostic Value of PSMA PET/CT in Men with Newly Diagnosed Unfavorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Letter to the Editor regarding “Automated Volumetric Software in Dementia: Help or Hindrance to the Neuroradiologist?”
  • Reply:
  • Brain AVM’s Nidus: What if We Hadn’t Understood Anything?
Show more LETTERS

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner
  • Book Reviews

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire