ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2021
Radiographic findings of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated lung sound analysis using the LungPass platform: a sensitive and specific tool for identifying lower respiratory tract involvement in COVID-19.The European respiratory journal · 2021Article
- When COVID-19 saves lives: Accidental cancer diagnosis in an epidemic context.Ethics, medicine, and public health · 2021Article
- Radiographic findings of SARS-CoV-2 infection.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveThe 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study was undertaken to identify and compare findings of chest radiography and computed tomography among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
methodsThis retrospective study was undertaken at a tertiary care center. Eligible subjects included consecutive patients age 18 and over with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and July 2020. The primary outcome measures were results of chest radiography and computed tomography among patients with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection.
resultsAmong 724 subjects, most were admitted to a medical floor (46.4%; N = 324) or admitted to an ICU (10.9%; N = 76). A substantial number of subjects were intubated during the emergency department visit or inpatient hospitalization (15.3%; N = 109). The majority of patients received a chest radiograph (80%; N = 579). The most common findings were normal, bilateral infiltrates, ground-glass opacities, or unilateral infiltrate. Among 128 patients who had both chest radiography and computed tomography, there was considerable disagreement between the 2 studies (52.3%; N = 67; 95% confidence interval: 43.7% to 61.0%).). The presence of bilateral infiltrates (infiltrates or ground-glass opacities) was associated with clinical factors including older age, ambulance arrivals, more urgent triage levels, higher heart rate, and lower oxygen saturation. Bilateral infiltrates were associated with poorer outcomes, including higher rate of intubation, greater number of inpatient days, and higher rate of death.
conclusionsCommon radiographic findings of SARS-CoV-2 infection include infiltrates or ground-glass opacities. There was considerable disagreement between chest radiography and computed tomography. Computed tomography was more accurate in defining the extent of involved lung parenchyma. The presence of bilateral infiltrates was associated with morbidity and mortality.
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.