ArticleArchives of rheumatology2021
Usefulness of digital velcro crackles detection in identification of interstitial lung disease in patients with connective tissue diseases.
Article in Archives of rheumatology, 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.
- Assessing feasibility of targeted primary care referrals for patients with clinical suspicion of interstitial lung disease using lung ultrasound: a prospective case finding study. The potential benefits of LUS utilization.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2023Article
- Deep learning diagnostic and severity-stratification for interstitial lung diseases and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in digital lung auscultations and ultrasonography: clinical protocol for an observational case-control study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2023Article
- VECTOR: An algorithm for the detection of COVID-19 pneumonia from velcro-like lung sounds.Computers in biology and medicine · 2022Article
- Diagnosis, Clinical Features and Management of Interstitial Lung Diseases in Rheumatic Disorders: Still a Long Journey.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the VECTOR software in patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs), compared with the reference standard of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT). PATIENTS AND
methodsThe study included 98 consecutive patients of CTD (24 males, 74 females; median age 66 years; range, 24 to 85 years) with a recent HRCT. Patients were evaluated in a blindly manner by VECTOR and the results obtained by the algorithm were compared with the presence of interstitial lung disease (ILD) according to HRCT.
resultsInterstitial lung disease was detected in 42.8% of subjects. VECTOR correctly classified 81/98 patients, with a diagnostic accuracy of 82.6%; sensitivity and specificity were 88.1% and 78.6%, respectively. Only 5/42 patients with ILD were not correctly classified by VECTOR, while false positive cases were 21.4%. No significant differences were observed according to the radiologic pattern of ILD.
conclusionVECTOR showed high sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy, allowing selecting patients to be investigated with HRCT. The relatively high frequency rate of false positive results is acceptable if compared with the lack of effective screening methods for this complication of CTDs.
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.