ArticleCureus2022
Comparison of Chest Computed Tomography Between the Two Waves of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Belgium Using Artificial Intelligence.
Article in Cureus, 2022. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background In this study, we aimed to compare two outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Belgium in tomographic and biological-clinical aspects with artificial intelligence (AI). Methodology We performed an observational retrospective study. Adult patients who were symptomatic in the first seven days with COVID-19 infection, diagnosed by chest computed tomography (CT) and/or reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, were included in this study. The first wave of the pandemic lasted from March 25, 2020, to May 25, 2020, and the second wave lasted from October 7, 2020, to December 7, 2020. For each wave, two subgroups were defined depending on whether respiratory failure occurred during the course of the disease. The quantitative estimation of COVID-19 lung lesions was performed by AI, radiologists, and radiology residents. The chest CT severity score was calculated by AI. Results In the 202 patients included in this study, we found statistically significant differences for obesity, hypertension, and asthma. The differences were predominant in the second wave. Moreover, a mixed distribution (central and peripherical) of pulmonary lesions was noted in the second wave, but no differences were noted regarding mortality, respiratory failure, complications, and other radiological and biological elements. Chest CT severity score was among the risk factors of mortality and respiratory failure. There was a mild agreement between AI and visual evaluation of pulmonary lesion extension (K = 0.4). Conclusions Between March and December 2020, in our cohort, for the majority of the parameters analyzed, we did not record significant changes between the two waves. AI can reduce the experience and performance gap of radiologists and better establish a hospitalization criterion.
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.