SynthesisLa Radiologia medica2022
A meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of CT-based radiomics for the prediction of COVID-19 severity.
Synthesis in La Radiologia medica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- MRI-based radiomics for prediction of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.La Radiologia medica · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Deep Learning Prediction Models on COVID-19 Severity: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Computed tomography-based radiomics improves non-invasive diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in non-HIV patients: a retrospective study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Trial
- Predictive models of severe disease in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at an early stage on CT images using topological properties.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
- All You Need to Know About TACE: A Comprehensive Review of Indications, Techniques, Efficacy, Limits, and Technical Advancement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Robust radiomics: a review of guidelines for radiomics in medical imaging.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Review
- Radiomics in radiology: What the radiologist needs to know about technical aspects and clinical impact.La Radiologia medica · 2024Review
- A radiomics model utilizing CT for the early detection and diagnosis of severe community-acquired pneumonia.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Statistical plots in oncologic imaging, a primer for neuroradiologists.The neuroradiology journal · 2024Review
- Diffusion kurtosis imaging and standard diffusion imaging in the magnetic resonance imaging assessment of prostate cancer.Gland surgery · 2023Review
- An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Tips and Tricks in Thoracic Radiology for Beginners: A Findings-Based Approach.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Review
- Qualitative and semi-quantitative ultrasound assessment in delta and Omicron Covid-19 patients: data from high volume reference center.Infectious agents and cancer · 2023Article
- Update on the Applications of Radiomics in Diagnosis, Staging, and Recurrence of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Exploring Radiologists' Burnout in the COVID-19 Era: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Radiation Recall Pneumonitis: The Open Challenge in Differential Diagnosis of Pneumonia Induced by Oncological Treatments.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Gender Medicine in Clinical Radiology Practice.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAccording to the Chinese Health Commission guidelines, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity is classified as mild, moderate, severe, or critical. The mortality rate of COVID-19 is higher among patients with severe and critical diseases; therefore, early identification of COVID-19 prevents disease progression and improves patient survival. Computed tomography (CT) radiomics, as a machine learning method, provides an objective and mathematical evaluation of COVID-19 pneumonia. As CT-based radiomics research has recently focused on COVID-19 diagnosis and severity analysis, this meta-analysis aimed to investigate the predictive power of a CT-based radiomics model in determining COVID-19 severity. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study followed the diagnostic version of PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched to identify relevant articles in the meta-analysis from inception until July 16, 2021. The sensitivity and specificity were analyzed using forest plots. The overall predictive power was calculated using the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. The bias was evaluated using a funnel plot. The quality of the included literature was assessed using the radiomics quality score and quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool.
resultsThe radiomics quality scores ranged from 7 to 16 (achievable score: 2212 8 to 36). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.800 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.662-0.891) and 0.874 (95% CI 0.773-0.934), respectively. The pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.908. The quality assessment tool showed favorable results.
conclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrated that CT-based radiomics models might be helpful for predicting the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia.
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.