Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32591286›Full record

ArticleRadiography (London, England : 1995)2021

Reporting radiographers' interpretation and use of the British Society of Thoracic Imaging's coding system when reporting COVID-19 chest x-rays.

Barry J Stevens

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiography (London, England : 1995), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Thoracic imaging tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Thoracic imaging tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. AI for COVID-19 Detection from Radiographs: Incisive Analysis of State of the Art Techniques, Key Challenges and Future Directions.Ingenierie et recherche biomedicale : IRBM = Biomedical engineering and research · 2022
    Review
  6. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Barry J StevensRadiology, Manor Hospital, Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust, Moat Road, Walsall, West Midlands, WS2 9PS, UK. Electronic address: barry.stevens@walsallhealthcare.nhs.uk.
Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe United Kingdom (UK) has experienced one of the worst initial waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical signs help guide initial diagnosis, though definitive diagnosis is made using the laboratory technique reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The chest x-ray (CXR) is used as the primary imaging investigation in the United Kingdom (UK) for patients with suspected COVID-19. In some hospitals these CXRs may be reported by a radiographer.

methodsRetrospective review of CXR reports by radiographers for suspected COVID-19 patients attending the Emergency Department (ED) of a hospital in the UK. Interpretation and use of the British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI) coding system was assessed. Report description and code use were cross-checked. Report and code usage were checked against the RT-PCR result to determine accuracy. Report availability was checked against the availability of the RT-PCR result. A confusion matrix was utilised to determine performance. The data were analysed manually using Excel.

resultsSample size was 320 patients; 54.1% male patients (n = 173), 45.9% female patients (n = 147). The correct code matched report descriptions in 316 of the 320 cases (98.8%). In 299 of the 320 cases (93.4%), the reports were available before the RT-PCR swab result. CXR sensitivity for detecting COVID-19 was 85% compared to 93% for the initial RT-PCR.

conclusionReporting radiographers can adequately utilise and apply the BSTI classification system when reporting COVID-19 CXRs. They can recognise the classic CXR appearances of COVID-19 and those with normal appearances. Future best practice includes checking laboratory results when reporting CXRs with ambiguous appearances. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Utilisation of reporting radiographers to report CXRs in any future respiratory pandemic should be considered a service-enabling development.

Indexed as

Radiography, ThoracicAdultAgedAged, 80 and overClinical CodingCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedResearch DesignRetrospective StudiesSocieties, MedicalUnited KingdomYoung AdultAdvanced practiceBSTICOVID-19CXRReporting radiographers

Identifiers

PMID32591286
PMCPMC7301077
OpenAlexW3035967436

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.