Observational studyEuropean journal of radiology2020
Chest x-ray in the COVID-19 pandemic: Radiologists' real-world reader performance.
Observational study in European journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Thoracic imaging tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Thoracic imaging tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Lung ultrasound is cost-effective for early diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia in primary care.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Multi-centre benchmarking of deep learning models for COVID-19 detection in chest x-rays.Frontiers in radiology · 2024Article
- Chest radiograph classification and severity of suspected COVID-19 by different radiologist groups and attending clinicians: multi-reader, multi-case study.European radiology · 2023Article
- RADIC:A tool for diagnosing COVID-19 from chest CT and X-ray scans using deep learning and quad-radiomics.Chemometrics and intelligent laboratory systems : an international journal sponsored by the Chemometrics Society · 2023Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Post-acute COVID syndrome (long COVID): What should radiographers know and the potential impact for imaging services.Radiography (London, England : 1995) · 2022Review
- 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 · 2022Review
- Optimisation of COVID-19 diagnostic pathways in acute hospital admissions to prevent nosocomial transmission.The clinical respiratory journal · 2022Article
- Development and Validation of a Multimodal-Based Prognosis and Intervention Prediction Model for COVID-19 Patients in a Multicenter Cohort.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Usefulness of Hospital Admission Chest X-ray Score for Predicting Mortality and ICU Admission in COVID-19 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Detection of Pneumonia in Chest Radiographs.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Learning from imbalanced COVID-19 chest X-ray (CXR) medical imaging data.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2022Article
- [Korean Clinical Imaging Guidelines for Justification of Diagnostic Imaging Study for COVID-19].Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe chi · 2022Review
- Convolutional Neural Network-Based Automatic Analysis of Chest Radiographs for the Detection of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Prioritizing Tool in the Emergency Department, Phase I Study and Preliminary "Real Life" Results.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Automatic coronavirus disease 2019 diagnosis based on chest radiography and deep learning - Success story or dataset bias?Medical physics · 2022Article
- Chest Radiograph Scoring Alone or Combined with Other Risk Scores for Predicting Outcomes in COVID-19.Radiology · 2022Observational
- COVID-CXNet: Detecting COVID-19 in frontal chest X-ray images using deep learning.Multimedia tools and applications · 2022Article
- External validation of Machine Learning models for COVID-19 detection based on Complete Blood Count.Health information science and systems · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo report real-world diagnostic performance of chest x-ray (CXR) readings during the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsIn this retrospective observational study we enrolled all patients presenting to the emergency department of a Milan-based university hospital from February 24th to April 8th 2020 who underwent nasopharyngeal swab for reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and anteroposterior bedside CXR within 12 h. A composite reference standard combining RT-PCR results with phone-call-based anamnesis was obtained. Radiologists were grouped by CXR reading experience (Group-1, >10 years; Group-2, <10 years), diagnostic performance indexes were calculated for each radiologist and for the two groups.
resultsGroup-1 read 435 CXRs (77.0 % disease prevalence): sensitivity was 89.0 %, specificity 66.0 %, accuracy 83.7 %. Group-2 read 100 CXRs (73.0 % prevalence): sensitivity was 89.0 %, specificity 40.7 %, accuracy 76.0 %. During the first half of the outbreak (195 CXRs, 66.7 % disease prevalence), overall sensitivity was 80.8 %, specificity 67.7 %, accuracy 76.4 %, Group-1 sensitivity being similar to Group-2 (80.6 % versus 81.5 %, respectively) but higher specificity (74.0 % versus 46.7 %) and accuracy (78.4 % versus 69.0 %). During the second half (340 CXRs, 81.8 % prevalence), overall sensitivity increased to 92.8 %, specificity dropped to 53.2 %, accuracy increased to 85.6 %, this pattern mirrored in both groups, with decreased specificity (Group-1, 58.0 %; Group-2, 33.3 %) but increased sensitivity (92.7 % and 93.5 %) and accuracy (86.5 % and 81.0 %, respectively).
conclusionsReal-world CXR diagnostic performance during the COVID-19 pandemic showed overall high sensitivity with higher specificity for more experienced radiologists. The increase in accuracy over time strengthens CXR role as a first line examination in suspected COVID-19 patients.
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.