ArticleActa clinica Croatica2024
COMPARISON OF CT REPORTING SYSTEMS IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING THORAX COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR COVID-19 PNEUMONIA.
Article in Acta clinica Croatica, 2024. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to compare three commonly used computed tomography (CT) reporting systems for COVID-19, i.e., Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) Consensus, British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI) Guideline, and Dutch Radiological Society Categorical CT Assesment Scheme: COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS). Three thousand thoracic CT scans taken consecutively because of COVID-19 suspicion, diagnosis or follow-up after admission to our hospital between March 2020 and May 2020 were studied. All CT examinations were assigned to the appropriate groups of the aferomentioned CT reporting systems and these systems were compared with each other. Thorax CT imaging did not reveal any findings indicative of infection (RSNA: 40.7%, BTSI: nonapplicable, and CO-RADS: 40.1%) in the vast majority of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (+) cases in all three reporting systems. The highest number of cases was included in the groups classified as typical/classic/CO-RADS 5 findings in all three reporting systems (RSNA: 213, BSTI: 212, and CO-RADS:101) in COVID-19 diagnosed cases with lung findings. There was no significant difference between PCR (+) and (-) cases with probable COVID-19 infection according to BSTI reporting system and CO-RADS 4 cases (30/23, p=0.381 and 22/19, p=0.245, respectively). In addition, typical thoracic CT findings were observed in RSNA: 70, BSTI: 71, CO-RADS: 71 individuals in all three classifications, but the PCR result was detected negative. When the three reporting systems were compared, we concluded that they did not show distinct advantage to each other and all three ensured that patients were properly classified with similar accuracy.
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.