ReviewClinical imaging2023
Detection of COVID-19 pulmonary manifestations with radiotherapy simulation CT imaging.
Review in Clinical imaging, 2023. 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, 1 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
COVID-19 is associated with characteristic lung CT findings. Radiotherapy simulation CT scans may reveal characteristic COVID-19 findings and identify patients with active or prior infection. We reviewed patients undergoing CT simulation at a major cancer center in an early epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Scans were reviewed by radiation oncologists using established radiographic criteria for COVID-19 pneumonia. Radiographic classifications were compared with available COVID-19 PCR test results. A one-tailed t-test was used to compare the rate of positive COVID-19 tests in radiographically suspicious vs. non-suspicious groups. Scans deemed suspicious were re-reviewed by expert diagnostic radiologists. 414 CT simulation scans were performed on 400 patients. 119 patients had COVID-19 PCR test results available. Radiation oncologists considered 71 scans (17.1%) suspicious for COVID-19. Of these, 23 had corresponding COVID-19 PCR tests, and 3/23 (15.7%) were positive for COVID. 107 non-suspicious scans had corresponding COVID-19 test results, and 9 were positive (8.4%). The difference in positive test results between suspicious and non-suspicious groups was not significant (p = 0.23). Upon re-review by a diagnostic radiologist, 25 (35%) scans deemed suspicious by radiation oncologists were confirmed to meet criteria, while the rest were re-classified as "atypical" for COVID-19. We conclude that radiotherapy simulation CT scans can be reviewed for signs of COVID-19 pneumonia by radiation oncologists. However, suspicious CT simulation was not associated with a higher incidence of COVID infection compared with non-suspicious CT simulation, and there was low concordance between radiation oncologist and diagnostic radiologist classification of scans.
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.