ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2021
Diagnostic performance of Radiological Society of North America structured reporting language for chest computed tomography findings in patients with COVID-19.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Do COVID-19 CT features vary between patients from within and outside mainland China? Findings from a meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Agreement between emergency medicine residents and radiologists in RSNA-Based chest CT interpretation.Emergency radiology · 2026Article
- Integrating Radiology & Clinical Decision Support to Drive Management of Emergency Department Patients in a Large Academic Medical Center.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Fairness of artificial intelligence in healthcare: review and recommendations.Japanese journal of radiology · 2024Review
- New trend in artificial intelligence-based assistive technology for thoracic imaging.La Radiologia medica · 2023Review
- Diagnostic performance of standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- RSNA and BSTI grading systems of COVID-19 pneumonia: comparison of the diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement.BMC medical imaging · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of the RSNA structured reporting language for chest CT findings in patients with COVID-19. MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients with suspected COVID-19 who underwent chest CT and RT-PCR tests were enrolled consecutively in this retrospective study, regardless of symptoms. Imaging findings were categorized as "typical", "indeterminate", "atypical", or "negative" according to RSNA reporting language and compared to RT-PCR. "Single, round GGO" and "single, peripheral GGO," do not fit the reporting language, were also analyzed as "indeterminate" patterns.
resultsOf the 1186 patients included in the analysis, the diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed in 388 patients. Of the 388 patients, CT findings were categorized as "typical" in 248, "indeterminate" in 77, and "negative" in 63. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of "typical" findings were 63.9, 99.0, and 87.5% for COVID-19, respectively. In addition to the "typical" findings, the highest diagnostic accuracy of 92.2% was achieved when the "single, peripheral GGO" and "single, round GGO" were considered to be CT-positive.
conclusionThe RSNA reporting language has significant diagnostic performance for identifying COVID-19 pneumonia. CT findings that do not exactly fit the RSNA reporting language, such as "single, round GGO" and "single, peripheral GGO" improve diagnostic performance.
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.