Fig 1.
*Participants (n = 23) with incidental urolithiasis/calcifications (n = 17) or failed attendance of Swiss Kidney Stone Cohort (SKSC) study visit (n = 6) that were excluded from the SKSC control group were retained in this study for further analysis of incidental computed tomography (CT) findings and psychological assessment.
Table 1.
Characteristics of the study population.
Table 2.
Incidental findings categorized as incidentaloma by the American College of Radiology (ACR) Incidental Findings Committee.
Table 3.
Incidental findings described by the radiologist but not categorized as incidentaloma by the American College of Radiology (ACR) Incidental Findings Committee.
Table 4.
Follow up costs for incidental findings.
Fig 2.
‘Emotional Distress’ (A) and ‘Level of Concern’ (B) across CT findings categories.
Box plots illustrating the distributions of ‘Emotional Distress’ (A) and ‘Level of Concern’ (B) across CT findings categories: ‘No finding’, ‘No follow-up’ and ‘Follow-up’. Emotional distress was assessed with the question, “How much did the results of your CT examination affect you emotionally (scale 1-10) (e.g., having feelings of fear, agitation, or depression)?”, and level of concern was gauged by asking, “How worried were you about receiving the results of your CT examination (scale 1-10)?”. Statistical significance, as determined by Kruskal-Wallis test, is denoted above the relevant groups with *representing a p-value threshold of p < 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01 and ***p ≤ 0.001.
Fig 3.
‘Emotional Distress’ (A) and ‘Level of Concern’ (B) across resilience groups.
Box plots illustrating the distributions of ‘Emotional Distress’ (A) and ‘Level of Concern’ (B): for each resilience group (Low, Normal, High). Emotional distress was assessed with the question, “How much did the results of your CT examination affect you emotionally (scale 1-10) (e.g., having feelings of fear, agitation, or depression)?”, and level of concern was gauged by asking, “How worried were you about receiving the results of your CT examination (scale 1-10)?”. Statistical significance, as determined by Kruskal-Wallis tests, is denoted above the relevant groups with *representing a p-value threshold of p < 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01 and ***p ≤ 0.001.
Fig 4.
Distribution of ‘Emotional Distress’ (A) and ‘Level of Concern’ (B) across resilience groups.
Box plots representing distributions of ‘Emotional Distress’ (A) and ‘Level of Concern’ (B) for each resilience group (Low, Normal, High) subdivided by CT findings (No finding, No follow-up, Follow-up). The boxes show the range from the maximum to the minimum value observed, with the median values indicated within (as horizontal lines) and above each box. Statistical significance, as determined by Kruskal-Wallis test, is denoted above the relevant groups with asterisks representing a p-value threshold of p < 0.05.