Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35348865›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2022

Diagnostic performance of CO-RADS for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Guina Liu, Yuntian Chen, A Runa, Jiaming Liu

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Coronavirus disease 2019 and lung cancer: where are we?Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Guina Liu *Department of Ophthalmology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Yuntian Chen *Department of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
A RunaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, West China Second Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Jiaming LiuDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People's Republic of China. JM3099@163.com.
Sichuan University · CNWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CNWest China Second University Hospital of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the diagnostic performance of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) for detecting COVID-19.

methodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus database until September 21, 2021. Statistical analysis included data pooling, forest plot construction, heterogeneity testing, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses.

resultsWe included 24 studies with 8382 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) of CO-RADS ≥ 3 for detecting COVID-19 were 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-0.93), 0.68 (95% CI 0.60-0.75), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.90), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity and AUC of CO-RADS ≥ 4 were 0.83 (95% CI 0.79-0.87), 0.84 (95% CI 0.78-0.88), and 0.90 (95% CI 0.87-0.92), respectively. Cochran's Q test (p < 0.01) and Higgins I

conclusionsCO-RADS has favorable performance in detecting COVID-19. CO-RADS ≥ 3/4 might be applied as cutoff values given their high sensitivity and specificity. However, there is a need for more well-designed studies on CO-RADS. KEY POINTS: • CO-RADS shows a favorable performance in detecting COVID-19. • CO-RADS ≥ 3 had a high sensitivity 0.89 (95% CI 0.85-0.93), and it may prove advantageous in screening the potentially infected people to prevent the spread of COVID-19. • CO-RADS ≥ 4 had high specificity 0.84 (95% CI 0.78-0.88) and may be more suitable for definite diagnosis of COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19Data SystemsHumansSensitivity and SpecificityCO-RADSCOVID-19DiagnosisSensitivitySpecificity

Identifiers

PMID35348865
PMCPMC8961267
OpenAlexW4220869457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.