ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2021
The prognostic value of chest X-ray in patients with COVID-19 on admission and when starting CPAP.
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utility of chest radiograph severity scoring in emergency department for predicting outcomes in COVID-19: A study of 1275 patients.Clinical imaging · 2023Article
- Article
- Chest X-ray Does Not Predict the Risk of Endotracheal Intubation and Escalation of Treatment in COVID-19 Patients Requiring Noninvasive Respiratory Support.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Non-invasive respiratory support in the management of acute COVID-19 pneumonia: considerations for clinical practice and priorities for research.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective was to explore if chest X-ray severity, assessed using a validated scoring system, predicts patient outcome on admission and when starting continuous positive pressure ventilation (CPAP) for COVID-19.
designThe study was a retrospective case-controlled study.
participantsThere were 163 patients with COVID-19 deemed candidates for CPAP on admission, including 58 who subsequently required CPAP. OUTCOME MEASURES: On admission, we measured the proportion of patients meeting a composite 'negative' outcome of requiring CPAP, intubation or dying versus successful ward-based care. For those escalated to CPAP, 'negative' outcomes were intubation or death versus successful de-escalation of respiratory support.
resultsOur results were stratified into tertiles, those with 'moderate' or 'severe' X-rays on admission had significantly higher odds of negative outcome versus 'mild' (odds ratio (OR) 2.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.121-4.803; p=0.023; and OR 3.600; 95% CI 1.681-7.708; p=0.001, respectively). This could not be demonstrated in those commencing CPAP (OR 0.976; 95% CI 0.754-1.264; p=0.856).
conclusionsWe outline a scoring system to stratify X-rays by severity and directly link this to prognosis. However, we were unable to demonstrate this association in the patients commencing CPAP.
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.