ReviewWorld journal of radiology2021
Highlighting COVID-19: What the imaging exams show about the disease.
Review in World journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- What Is COVID 19 Teaching Us about Pulmonary Ultrasound?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a global emergency, is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The gold standard for its diagnosis is the reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, but considering the high number of infected people, the low availability of this diagnostic tool in some contexts, and the limitations of the test, other tools that aid in the identification of the disease are necessary. In this scenario, imaging exams such as chest X-ray (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) have played important roles. CXR is useful for assessing disease progression because it allows the detection of extensive consolidations, besides being a fast and cheap method. On the other hand, CT is more sensitive for detecting lung changes in the early stages of the disease and is also useful for assessing disease progression. Of note, ground-glass opacities are the main COVID-19-related CT findings. Positron emission tomography combined with CT can be used to evaluate chronic and substantial damage to the lungs and other organs; however, it is an expensive test. Lung ultrasound (LUS) has been shown to be a promising technique in that context as well, being useful in the screening and monitoring of patients, disease classification, and management related to mechanical ventilation. Moreover, LUS is an inexpensive alternative available at the bedside. Finally, magnetic resonance imaging, although not usually requested, allows the detection of pulmonary, cardiovascular, and neurological abnormalities associated with COVID-19. Furthermore, it is important to consider the challenges faced in the radiology field in the adoption of control measures to prevent infection and in the follow-up of post-COVID-19 patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.