ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2022
Comparison of two different lung ultrasound imaging protocols in COVID-19 pneumonia.
Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Shear Wave Elastography in Predicting Malignant Origins of Pleural Effusions in Emergency Departments.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Tiny Lungs, Big Differences: Navigating the Varied COVID-19 Landscape in Neonates vs. Infants via Biomarkers and Lung Ultrasound.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Lung Ultrasound Elastography by SWE2D and "Fibrosis-like" Computed Tomography Signs after COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Follow-Up Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Ultrasound assessment of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: a literature review for the primary care physician.Annals of medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of two different lung ultrasonography (LUS) methods that can be used in the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to investigate their correlations with computed tomography (CT).
methodsIn this prospective, randomized, and single-blind study, 60 patients with COVID-19 were included. The patients were randomized to either the 12-zone LUS group (n=30) or the 14-zone LUS group (n=30). The correlation between LUS and thoracic CT scores was evaluated. As a secondary outcome measure, the characteristic features of the findings of thoracic CT and LUS were examined.
resultsThe study was completed with a total of 59 patients. Moderate and high correlations were found between the total CT and LUS scores in the 12-zone and 14-zone study groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the lesion types detected in patients using LUS and CT (P>0.05). The left lung lower lobe CT scores were statistically significantly lower in the 14-zone study group than in the 12-zone group (P=0.019). The left lower lobe CT and LUS scores were highly correlated in the 14-zone group (P<0.001, r=0.902).
conclusionThe results of our study indicated that the two different LUS examination methods performed in different patients had similar findings in terms of the diagnosis and their correlations with CT results.
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.