Cited by 112COVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesMedical Imaging and Pathology StudiesInterstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

Ground-glass opacity (GGO): a review of the differential diagnosis in the era of COVID-19

Open access
Cozzi, Diletta, Cavigli, Edoardo, Moroni, Chiara, Smorchkova, Olga, Zantonelli, Giulia, Pradella, Silvia, Miele, Vittorio·2021·Japanese Journal of Radiology

Abstract

Thoracic imaging is fundamental in the diagnostic route of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) especially in patients admitted to hospitals. In particular, chest computed tomography (CT) has a key role in identifying the typical features of the infection. Ground-glass opacities (GGO) are one of the main CT findings, but their presence is not specific for this viral pneumonia. In fact, GGO is a radiological sign of different pathologies with both acute and subacute/chronic clinical manifestations. In the evaluation of a subject with focal or diffuse GGO, the radiologist has to know the patient's medical history to obtain a valid diagnostic hypothesis. The authors describe the various CT appearance of GGO, related to the onset of symptoms, focusing also on the ancillary signs that can help radiologist to obtain a correct and prompt diagnosis.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11604-021-01120-w

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The COVID-19 pandemic increased the number of COVID-19-related studies from Japan, with a significant increase in such research focusing on AI.

    “Furthermore, owing to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the number of COVID-19-related studies from Japan has increased [54–61], with a significant increase in such research focusing on AI [62–64].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cozzi, D., Cavigli, E., Moroni, C., Smorchkova, O., Zantonelli, G., Pradella, S., & Miele, V.
Affiliations
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (IT)
Corresponding author
Cozzi, Diletta
Venue
Japanese Journal of Radiology
Published
2021-04-26
Volume
39
Issue
8
Pages
721-732
ISSN
  • 1867-1071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1867-108X
OpenAlex
W3158352196
Cited by
112
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 3
FWCI
2.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Japanese Journal of Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Medical Imaging and Pathology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Interstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
Keywords
ground-glass opacities, COVID-19 pandemic, differential diagnosis, chest CT, viral pneumonia, computed tomography findings
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Diagnosis, Differential, Humans, Lung, Retrospective Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review