ArticlePloS one2021
High-risk chest radiographic features associated with COVID-19 disease severity.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing chest radiographic quality and the influence of COVID-19 pathology: the Australian experience.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
- Deep Learning With Chest Radiographs for Making Prognoses in Patients With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Breakthrough COVID-19 Infection During the Delta Variant Dominant Period: Individualized Care Based on Vaccination Status Is Needed.Journal of Korean medical science · 2022Article
- Article
- Intersections between pneumonia, lowered oxygen saturation percentage and immune activation mediate depression, anxiety, and chronic fatigue syndrome-like symptoms due to COVID-19: A nomothetic network approach.Journal of affective disorders · 2022Article
- Factors Associated With Hospitalization or Intensive Care Admission in Children With COVID-19 in Latin America.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHigh-risk CXR features in COVID-19 are not clearly defined. We aimed to identify CXR features that correlate with severe COVID-19.
methodsAll confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted within the study period were screened. Those with suboptimal baseline CXR were excluded. CXRs were reviewed by three independent radiologists and opacities recorded according to zones and laterality. The primary endpoint was defined as hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen, and CXR features were assessed for association with this endpoint to identify high-risk features. These features were then used to define criteria for a high-risk CXR, and clinical features and outcomes of patients with and without baseline high-risk CXR were compared using logistic regression analysis.
results109 patients were included. In the initial analysis of 40 patients (36.7%) with abnormal baseline CXR, presence of bilateral opacities, multifocal opacities, or any upper or middle zone opacity were associated with supplemental oxygen requirement. Of the entire cohort, 29 patients (26.6%) had a baseline CXR with at least one of these features. Having a high-risk baseline CXR was significantly associated with requiring supplemental oxygen in univariate (odds ratio 14.0, 95% confidence interval 3.90-55.60) and multivariate (adjusted odds ratio 8.38, 95% CI 2.43-28.97, P = 0.001) analyses.
conclusionWe identified several high-risk CXR features that are significantly associated with severe illness. The association of upper or middle zone opacities with severe illness has not been previously emphasized. Recognition of these specific high-risk CXR features is important to prioritize limited healthcare resources for sicker 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.