ArticleClinical imaging2022
Diagnostic accuracy of CO-RADS in patients with suspected Coronavirus Disease-2019: A single center experience.
Article in Clinical imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic performance of standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
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
introductionCOVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) is a tool for standardizing the reports of patients with suspected or confirmed Sars-CoV-2 infection. We performed a study of the performance of the CO-RADS in a triage scenario of patients in Brazil.
methodsData from 426 Computed Tomography (CT) scans from March 2020 through December 2020 were assessed in an ambidirectional, both retrospective and prospective, for the assessment in one of the six categories of the CO-RADS. We assessed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) Youden's index, Positive and Negative Clinical Utility Index (UC + and UC- respectively) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). We also plotted Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve with Area Under the Curve (AUC) for CO-RADS of >4 (4 + 5).
resultsFor CO-RADS classification > 4 (4 + 5) considered positive, the AUC obtained was of 0.89 (95% CI of 0.02), sensitivity of 78% (95% CI of 0.3), specificity of 91% (95% CI of 0.3), PPV of 0.92 (95% CI of 0.02), NPV of 0.41 (95% CI of 0.03), PLR of 0.85 (95% CI of 0.2), and NLR of 0.23 (95% CI of 0.02).
conclusionCO-RADS demonstrated overall good diagnostic performance in stratifying patients with suspected Sars-CoV-2 infection, even those without confirmed laboratorial diagnosis, therefore being useful in a triage scenario with lack of resources.
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.