Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28054135›Full record

ReviewDer Radiologe2017

[Community-acquired pneumonia].

S Poetter-Lang, C J Herold

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Radiologe, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S Poetter-LangDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Allgemeines Krankenhaus, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich. sarah.poetter-lang@meduniwien.ac.at.
C J HeroldDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Allgemeines Krankenhaus, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich.
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical issueThe diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is often not possible based only on the clinical symptoms and biochemical parameters. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL

methodsFor every patient with the suspicion of CAP, a chest radiograph in two planes should be carried out. Additionally, a risk stratification for the decision between outpatient therapy or hospitalization is recommended. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: Based on the evaluation of the different radiological patterns as well as their extent and distribution, a rough allocation to so-called pathogen groups as well as a differentiation between viral and bacterial infections are possible; however, because different pathogens cause different patterns an accurate correlation is not feasible by relying purely on imaging. ACHIEVEMENTS/PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: The radiological findings serve as proof or exclusion of pneumonia and can also be used to evaluate the extent of the disease (e.g. monolobular, multilobular, unilateral or bilateral). In cases of prolonged disease, suspicion of complications (e.g. pleural effusion or empyema, necrotizing pneumonia or abscess) or comorbid conditions (e.g. underlying pulmonary or mediastinal diseases) computed tomography is an important diagnostic tool in addition to chest radiography. Ultrasound is often used to diagnose pleural processes (e.g. parapneumonic effusion or pleural empyema).

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareCommunity-Acquired InfectionsDiagnosis, DifferentialEvidence-Based MedicineHumansLungPneumoniaRadiography, ThoracicTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographyChest radiographComputed tomographyImaging algorithmPulmonary consolidationRadiological patterns

Identifiers

PMID28054135
OpenAlexW2571489633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.