The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Indications for operation in suspected appendicitis and incidence of perforation
Open accessAbstract
Objective : To clarify poorly understood epidemiological features of appendicitis. Design : Retrospective study of consecutive cases from a defined population and analysis of data from published studies. Setting : County of Jonkoping, Sweden. 3029 patients who underwent operation in 1984-9 and 4717 patients from the county town who underwent operation in 1970-89, all for suspected appendicitis, plus 48 426 cases from six reported studies. Main outcome measures : Incidences specific for age and sex and temporal trends of perforating and non-perforating appendicitis and removal of a normal appendix. Associations between diagnostic accuracy, rate of perforation, and incidences of removal of a normal appendix and of perforating and non-perforating appendicitis. Results : The incidence of appendicitis was 116/100 000 inhabitants. Appendicitis was more common in male patients. The incidence of perforating appendicitis was independent of age, stable overtime, and uninfluenced by the rate of laparotomy, whereas the incidence of non-perforating appendicitis was age dependent, decreasing over time, and related to the diagnostic accuracy and rate of removal of a normal appendix. Conclusions : Perforating and non-perforating appendicitis seem to be separate entities, and appendicitis that resolves spontaneously is common. This may have important implications for managing suspected appendicitis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
External review and validation of the Swedish national inpatient register
Ludvigsson, J. F., Andersson, E., Ekbom, A., Feychting, M., Kim, J.-L., Reuterwall, C., Heurgren, M., & Olausson, P. O. (2011) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-11-450 · Cited by 5,055
Appendectomy and Protection against Ulcerative Colitis
Andersson, R. E., Olaison, G., Tysk, C., & Ekbom, A. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200103153441104 · Cited by 503
Self-citationDiagnosis and management of acute appendicitis. EAES consensus development conference 2015
Gorter, R. R., Eker, H. H., Gorter-Stam, M. A. W., Abis, G. S. A., Acharya, A., Ankersmit, M., Antoniou, S. A., Arolfo, S., Babic, B., Boni, L., et al. (2016) · Surgical Endoscopy · doi:10.1007/s00464-016-5245-7 · Cited by 473
Incidence of Acute Nonperforated and Perforated Appendicitis: Age‐specific and Sex‐specific Analysis
Körner, H., Söndenaa, K., Söreide, J. A., Andersen, E., Nysted, A., Lende, T. H., & Kjellevold, K. H. (1997) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s002689900235 · Cited by 458
Andersson, R. E. (2007) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-006-0056-y · Cited by 351
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Andersson, R., Hugander, A., Thulin, A., Nystrom, P. O., & Olaison, G.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1994-01-08
- Volume
- 308
- Issue
- 6921
- Pages
- 107-110
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2082281561
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Indications for operation in suspected appendicitis and incidence of perforation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.308.6921.107
- The paper
- Andersson, R., Hugander, A., Thulin, A., Nystrom, P. O., & Olaison, G. (1994). Indications for operation in suspected appendicitis and incidence of perforation. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.308.6921.107
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.