ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2020
Assessment of Acute Pulmonary Embolism by Computer-Aided Technique: A Reliability Study.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time efficiency and reliability of established computed tomographic obstruction scores in patients with acute pulmonary embolism.PloS one · 2021Trial
- Pulmonary hypertension in Takayasu arteritis with pulmonary artery involvement: risk factors and impact on mortality.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Observational
- Predictors of Residual Pulmonary Vascular Obstruction after Acute Pulmonary Embolism Based on Patient Variables and Treatment Modality.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Prognostic Role of Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography (CTPA).Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Acute pulmonary embolism is one of the most common cardiovascular diseases. Computer-aided technique is widely used in chest imaging, especially for assessing pulmonary embolism. The reliability and quantitative analyses of computer-aided technique are necessary. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of geometry-based computer-aided detection and quantification for emboli morphology and severity of acute pulmonary embolism. MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty patients suspected of acute pulmonary embolism were analyzed by both manual and computer-aided interpretation of vascular obstruction index and computer-aided measurements of emboli quantitative parameters. The reliability of Qanadli and Mastora scores was analyzed using computer-aided and manual interpretation. RESULTS The time costs of manual and computer-aided interpretation were statistically different (374.90±150.16 versus 121.07±51.76, P<0.001). The difference between the computer-aided and manual interpretation of Qanadli score was 1.83±2.19, and 96.7% (29 out of 30) of the measurements were within 95% confidence interval (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC=0.998). The difference between the computer-aided and manual interpretation of Mastora score was 1.46±1.62, and 96.7% (29 out of 30) of the measurements were within 95% confidence interval (ICC=0.997). The emboli quantitative parameters were moderately correlated with the Qanadli and Mastora scores (all P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Computer-aided technique could reduce the time costs, improve the and reliability of vascular obstruction index and provided additional quantitative parameters for disease assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.