ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Lung field-based severity score (LFSS): a feasible tool to identify COVID-19 patients at high risk of progressing to critical disease.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) still poses a threat to people's physical and mental health. We proposed a new semi-quantitative visual classification method for COVID-19, and this study aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness and feasibility of lung field-based severity score (LFSS). Methods: This retrospective study included 794 COVID-19 patients from two hospitals in China between December 2022 and January 2023. Six lung fields on the axial computed tomography (CT) were defined. LFSS and eighteen clinical characteristics were evaluated. LFSS was based on summing up the parenchymal opacification involving each lung field, which was scored as 0 (0%), 1 (1-24%), 2 (25-49%), 3 (50-74%), or 4 (75-100%), respectively (range of LFSS from 0 to 24). Total pneumonia burden (TPB) was calculated using the U-net model. The correlation between LFSS and TPB was analyzed. After performing logistic regression analysis, an LFSS-based model, clinical-based model and combined model were developed. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate and compare the performance of three models. Results: LFSS, age, chronic liver disease, chronic kidney disease, white blood cell, neutrophils, lymphocytes and C-reactive protein differed significantly between the non-critical and critical group (all P<0.05). There was a strong positive correlation of LFSS and TPB (Pearson correlation coefficient =0.767, P<0.001). The area under curves of LFSS-based model, clinical-based model and combined model were 0.799 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.770-0.827], 0.758 (95% CI: 0.727-0.788), and 0.848 (95% CI: 0.821-0.872), respectively. Conclusions: The LFSS derived from chest CT may be a potential new tool to help identify COVID-19 patients at high risk of progressing to critical disease.
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.