Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34441286›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

A Comparison of Lung Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in the Diagnosis of Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mengshu Wang, Xufei Luo, Ling Wang, Janne Estill, Meng Lv, Ying Zhu, Qi Wang, Xiaojuan Xiao, Yang Song, Myeong Soo Lee and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Lung Ultrasound in Critical Care: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  6. Chest ultrasound for lung cancer: present and future.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. What Is COVID 19 Teaching Us about Pulmonary Ultrasound?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Mengshu WangEvidence-Based Medicine Centre, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Xufei LuoSchool of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0811-6326
Ling WangDepartment of Ultrasound, People's Hospital of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Janne EstillInstitute of Global Health, University of Geneva, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
Meng LvDepartment of Nephrology, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400014, China.
Ying ZhuEvidence-Based Medicine Centre, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Qi WangDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada.
Xiaojuan XiaoDepartment of Radiology, The Eighth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Shenzhen 518033, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2879-8048
Yang SongIberoamerican Cochrane Centre-Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), 08025 Barcelona, Spain.
Myeong Soo LeeKorea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon 34054, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6651-7641
Hyeong Sik AhnDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Korea.
Junqiang LeiDepartment of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Jinhui TianEvidence-Based Medicine Centre, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Lung ultrasound (LUS) and computed tomography (CT) can both be used for diagnosis of interstitial pneumonia caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the agreement between LUS and CT is unknown. Purpose to compare the agreement of LUS and CT in the diagnosis of interstitial pneumonia caused by COVID-19. Materials and Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Chinese Biomedicine Literature, and WHO COVID-19 databases to identify studies that compared LUS with CT in the diagnosis of interstitial pneumonia caused by COVID-19. We calculated the pooled overall, positive and negative percent agreements, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and the area under the standard receiver operating curve (SROC) for LUS in the diagnosis of COVID-19 compared with CT. Results We identified 1896 records, of which nine studies involving 531 patients were finally included. The pooled overall, positive and negative percentage agreements of LUS for the diagnosis of interstitial pneumonia caused by COVID-19 compared with CT were 81% (95% confidence interval [CI] 43-99%), 96% (95% CI, 80-99%, I

Indexed as

computed tomographyCOVID-19lung ultrasoundPOCUSsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34441286
PMCPMC8394642

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.