ArticleCureus2021
Using Statistical Measures and Density Maps Generated From Chest Computed Tomography Scans to Identify and Monitor COVID-19 Cases in Radiation Oncology Rapidly.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives This study aimed to evaluate quantitative and qualitative screening measures for anomalous computed tomography (CT) scans in cancer patients with potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as an automated detection tool in a radiation oncology treatment setting. Methods We identified a non-COVID-19 cohort and patients with suspected COVID-19 with chest CT scans from February 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020. Lungs were segmented, and a mean normal Hounsfield Unit (HU) histogram was generated for the non-COVID-19 CT scans; these were used to define thresholds for designating the COVID-19-suspected histograms as normal or abnormal. Statistical measures were computed and compared to the threshold levels, and density maps were generated to examine the difference between lungs with and without COVID-19 qualitatively. Results The non-COVID-19 cohort consisted of 70 patients with 70 CT scans, and the cohort of suspected COVID-19 patients consisted of 59 patients with 80 CT scans. Sixty-two patients were positive for COVID-19. The mean HUs and skewness of the intensity histogram discriminated between COVID-19 positive and negative cases, with an area under the curve of 0.948 for positive and 0.944 for negative cases. Skewness correctly identified 57 of 62 positive cases, whereas mean HUs correctly identified 17 of 18 negative cases. Density maps allowed for visualization of the temporal evolution of COVID-19 disease. Conclusions The statistical measures and density maps evaluated here could be employed in an automated screening algorithm for COVID-19 infection. The accuracy is high enough for a simple and rapid screening tool for early identification of suspected infection in patients treated with chemotherapy and radiation therapy already receiving CT scans as part of clinical care. This screening tool could also identify other infections that present critical risks for patients undergoing chemotherapy and radiation therapy, such as pneumonitis.
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.