Diagnostic Performance of COVID-19 Reporting and Data System Classification Across Residents and Radiologists: A Retrospective Study

Tunç, Melis Koşar; Kış, Naciye; İnce, Okan; Yıldız, Hülya; Önder, Hakan

doi:10.1097/rct.0000000000001172

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of a sensitivity analysis for 28 studies, including more than 50 subjects among both COVID-19 cases and non-COVID-19 cases, each, were similar to those of the primary analysis [ 9 , 20 – 24 , 26 – 28 , 30 , 33 – 38 , 41 , 45 – 48 , 50 – 52 , 54 – 57 ] (Additional file 1 : Fig. 4).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 53%

“…There were 18 studies from developing countries (4 studies from lower-middle-income and 14 studies from upper-middle-income countries) [ 18 , 19 , 22 , 23 , 30 – 32 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 43 – 45 , 47 , 48 , 50 , 51 , 58 ] and 24 studies from developed countries (high income) [ 9 , 20 , 21 , 24 – 29 , 33 , 34 , 36 , 39 – 42 , 46 , 49 , 52 – 57 ]. The included studies were predominantly from Europe (24 studies) [ 9 , 20 , 21 , 23 – 27 , 29 , 31 , 32 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 41 , 42 , 47 – 49 , 52 , 55 – 57 ], followed by the Americas (10 studies), Asia (seven studies), and Africa (one study). Nineteen studies for assessing the interobserver agreement are summarized in Additional file 1 : Table 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Diagnostic performance of standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To meta-analyze diagnostic performance measures of standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19 and examine these measures by region and national income. Methods MEDLINE and Embase were searched from January 2020 to April 2022 for diagnostic studies using the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) classification or the COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) for COVID-19. Patient and study characteristics were extracted. We pooled the diagnostic performance of typical CT findings in the RSNA and CO-RADS systems and interobserver agreement. Meta-regression was performed to examine the effect of potential explanatory factors on the diagnostic performance of the typical CT findings. Results We included 42 diagnostic performance studies with 6777 PCR-positive and 9955 PCR-negative patients from 18 developing and 24 developed countries covering the Americas, Europe, Asia, and Africa. The pooled sensitivity was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 65%, 74%; I2 = 92%), and the pooled specificity was 90% (95% CI 86%, 93%; I2 = 94%) for the typical CT findings of COVID-19. The sensitivity and specificity of the typical CT findings did not differ significantly by national income and the region of the study (p > 0.1, respectively). The pooled interobserver agreement from 19 studies was 0.72 (95% CI 0.63, 0.81; I2 = 99%) for the typical CT findings and 0.67 (95% CI 0.61, 0.74; I2 = 99%) for the overall CT classifications. Conclusion The standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19 provided moderate sensitivity and high specificity globally, regardless of region and national income, and were highly reproducible between radiologists. Critical relevance statement Standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19 provided a reproducible high diagnostic accuracy globally. Key points Standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19 provide high sensitivity and specificity. Typical CT findings show high diagnosability regardless of region or income. The interobserver agreement for typical findings of COVID-19 is substantial. Graphical abstract

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 53%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic performance of standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Diagnostic performance of CO-RADS for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Liu

Chen

et al. 2022

Eur Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To investigate the diagnostic performance of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) for detecting COVID-19. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus database until September 21, 2021. Statistical analysis included data pooling, forest plot construction, heterogeneity testing, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses. Results We included 24 studies with 8382 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) of CO-RADS ≥ 3 for detecting COVID-19 were 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85–0.93), 0.68 (95% CI 0.60–0.75), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.84–0.90), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity and AUC of CO-RADS ≥ 4 were 0.83 (95% CI 0.79–0.87), 0.84 (95% CI 0.78–0.88), and 0.90 (95% CI 0.87–0.92), respectively. Cochran’s Q test ( p < 0.01) and Higgins I 2 heterogeneity index revealed considerable heterogeneity. Studies with both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients had higher specificity than those with only symptomatic patients using CO-RADS ≥ 3 and CO-RADS ≥ 4. Using CO-RADS ≥ 4, studies with participants aged < 60 years had higher sensitivity (0.88 vs. 0.80, p = 0.02) and lower specificity (0.77 vs. 0.87, p = 0.01) than studies with participants aged > 60 years. Conclusions CO-RADS has favorable performance in detecting COVID-19. CO-RADS ≥ 3/4 might be applied as cutoff values given their high sensitivity and specificity. However, there is a need for more well-designed studies on CO-RADS. Key Points • CO-RADS shows a favorable performance in detecting COVID-19. • CO-RADS ≥ 3 had a high sensitivity 0.89 (95% CI 0.85–0.93), and it may prove advantageous in screening the potentially infected people to prevent the spread of COVID-19. • CO-RADS ≥ 4 had high specificity 0.84 (95% CI 0.78–0.88) and may be more suitable for definite diagnosis of COVID-19.

show abstract

No spectators in a pandemic: A comparison of radiologists, radiology residents, and CT technicians in interpreting chest CT scans for COVID-19

Alshabibi,

Alyami,

Alhujaili

2024

Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diagnostic Performance of COVID-19 Reporting and Data System Classification Across Residents and Radiologists: A Retrospective Study

Cited by 3 publications

References 23 publications

Diagnostic performance of standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Diagnostic performance of standardized typical CT findings for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Diagnostic performance of CO-RADS for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

No spectators in a pandemic: A comparison of radiologists, radiology residents, and CT technicians in interpreting chest CT scans for COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About