ReviewJournal of medical virology2020
The diagnosis of SARS-CoV2 pneumonia: A review of laboratory and radiological testing results.
Review in Journal of medical virology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- An update on novel approaches for diagnosis and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.Cell & bioscience · 2021Review
- LamPORE SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and genotyping: A preliminary report.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2021Article
- Biological characteristics and biomarkers of novel SARS-CoV-2 facilitated rapid development and implementation of diagnostic tools and surveillance measures.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2021Review
- The diagnosis of SARS-CoV2 pneumonia: A review of laboratory and radiological testing results.Journal of medical virology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has necessitated the implementation of diverse pandemic control strategies throughout the world. To effectively control the spread of this disease, it is essential that it be diagnosed at an early stage so that patients can be reliably quarantined such that disease spread will be slowed. At present, the diagnosis of this infectious form of coronavirus pneumonia is largely dependent upon a combination of laboratory testing and imaging analyses of variable diagnostic efficacy. In the present report, we reviewed prior literature pertaining to the diagnosis of different forms of pneumonia caused by coronaviruses (severe acute respiratory syndrome [SARS], Middle East respiratory syndrome, and SARS-CoV-2) and assessed two different potential diagnostic approaches. We ultimately found that computed tomography was associated with a higher rate of diagnostic accuracy than was a real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction-based approach (P = .0041), and chest radiography (P = .0100). Even so, it is important that clinicians utilize a combination of laboratory and radiological testing where possible to ensure that this virus is reliably and quickly detected such that it may be treated and patients may be isolated in a timely fashion, thereby effectively curbing the further progression of this pandemic.
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.