ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Chest computed tomography findings do not influence the decision of pneumologists regarding the diagnosis and management of pulmonary long coronavirus disease: a single center retrospective study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. 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.
- Functional alterations due to post-COVID-19 lung lesions - lessons from a multicenter V/Q SPECT/CT based registry.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
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
Background: Pulmonary symptoms are common in long coronavirus disease (COVID), yet the diagnostic value of chest computed tomography (CT) in these patients remains unclear, particularly when physical examination and pulmonary function tests are normal. This study investigates whether chest CT influences the decision of pneumologists regarding the measures taken for diagnostic work-up, the final diagnosis, the confidence in the diagnosis, and the downstream management of patients suspected to suffer from pulmonary long COVID. Methods: All patients presented in a dedicated long COVID outpatient clinic of a secondary care hospital that specializes in lung diseases between April 2020 and August 2021. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, suspicion for long COVID syndrome of pulmonary origin according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criteria and availability of a chest CT acquired during work-up. Three pneumologists evaluated the patient's records in two rounds (round 1 without and round 2 with knowledge of CT results). Identical parameters were queried in the two runs: diagnosis of pulmonary long COVID, confidence of the diagnosis on a scale from 0 to 3, need for: bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), transbronchial biopsy (TBB), cryobiopsy, video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS), ergospirometry, ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy, follow-up appointment, rehabilitation. Results: Forty-one patients were included (24 male; age 21 to 72 years, mean 55 years). In the first and second round diagnosis of pulmonary long COVID was made in an average of 10 (24%) and 11 (27%) patients (P=0.69). Confidence of diagnosis was 1.9 and 2.6 (P<0.001). No statistical difference was found regarding the frequency of diagnostic measures and downstream management. Conclusions: Chest CT did not influence the diagnostic decision of pneumologists for patients suspected to suffer from pulmonary long COVID. However, the confidence in the diagnosis was improved by chest CT. Still, based on our results chest CT does not routinely have to be included in the work-up of long COVID, when pulmonary function tests and auscultation are normal.
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.