Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32532596›Full record

ReviewRadiography (London, England : 1995)2020

COVID-19 in the radiology department: What radiographers need to know.

N Stogiannos, D Fotopoulos, N Woznitza, C Malamateniou

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Radiography (London, England : 1995), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

N StogiannosDepartment of Medical Imaging, Corfu General Hospital, Greece. Electronic address: nstogiannos@yahoo.com.
D FotopoulosUniversity Hospitals Morecambe NHS Trust, UK. Electronic address: d.fotopoulos@mbht.nhs.uk.
N WoznitzaRadiology Department, Homerton University Hospital, UK; School of Allied and Public Health Professions Canterbury Christ Church University, UK; NHS Nightingale Hospital London, UK. Electronic address: Nicholas.woznitza@nhs.net.
C MalamateniouDepartment of Radiography, School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK; King's College, London, UK. Electronic address: christina.malamateniou@city.ac.uk.
Canterbury Christ Church University · GBCity, University of London · GBUniversity Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust · GBYahoo (Spain) · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim is to review current literature related to the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of suspected and confirmed Covid-19 cases. KEY

findingsMedical Imaging plays an important auxiliary role in the diagnosis of Covid-19 patients, mainly those most seriously affected. Practice differs widely among different countries, mainly due to the variability of access to resources (viral testing and imaging equipment, specialised staff, protective equipment). It has been now well-documented that chest radiographs should be the first-line imaging tool and chest CT should only be reserved for critically ill patients, or when chest radiograph and clinical presentation may be inconclusive.

conclusionAs radiographers work on the frontline, they should be aware of the potential risks associated with Covid-19 and engage in optimal strategies to reduce these. Their role in vetting, conducting and often reporting the imaging examinations is vital, as well as their contribution in patient safety and care. Medical Imaging should be limited to critically ill patients, and where it may have an impact on the patient management plan. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: At the time of publication, this review offers the most up-to-date recommendations for clinical practitioners in radiology departments, including radiographers. Radiography practice has to significantly adjust to these new requirements to support optimal and safe imaging practices for the diagnosis of Covid-19. The adoption of low dose CT, rigorous infection control protocols and optimal use of personal protective equipment may reduce the potential risks of radiation exposure and infection, respectively, within Radiology departments.

Indexed as

Coronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FemaleHumansInfection ControlInfectious Disease Transmission, VerticalMaleOccupational HealthPandemicsPatient-Centered CarePatient SafetyPneumonia, ViralRadiography, ThoracicRadiologistsRadiology Department, HospitalSafety ManagementChestCOVID-19CTGuidelinesImagingRadiography

Identifiers

PMID32532596
PMCPMC7269964
OpenAlexW3033774031

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.