Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 281

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diagnostic performance between CT and initial real-time RT-PCR for clinically suspected 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients outside Wuhan, China

Open access
He, Jian-Long, Luo, Lin, Luo, Zhen-Dong, Lyu, Jian-Xun, Ng, Ming-Yen, Shen, Xin-Ping, Wen, Zhibo·2020·Respiratory Medicine

Abstract

Introduction Chest CT is thought to be sensitive but less specific in diagnosing the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The diagnostic value of CT is unclear. We aimed to compare the performance of CT and initial RT-PCR for clinically suspected COVID-19 patients outside the epicentre—Wuhan, China. Materials and methods Patients clinically suspected of COVID-19 infection who underwent initial RT-PCR and chest CT at the same time were retrospectively enrolled. Two radiologists with specific training reviewed the CT images independently and final diagnoses of the presence or absence of COVID-19 was reached by consensus. With serial RT-PCR as reference standard, the performance of initial RT-PCR and chest CT was analysed. A strategy of combining initial RT-PCR and chest CT was analysed to study the additional benefit. Results 82 patients admitted to hospital between Jan 10, 2020 to Feb 28, 2020 were enrolled. 34 COVID-19 and 48 non-COVID-19 patients were identified by serial RT-PCR. The sensitivity, specificity was 79% (27/34) and 100% (48/48) for initial RT-PCR and 77% (26/34) and 96% (46/48) for chest CT. The image readers had a good interobserver agreement with Cohen's kappa of 0.69. No statistical difference was found in the diagnostic performance between initial RT-PCR and chest CT. The comprehensive strategy had a higher sensitivity of 94% (32/34). Conclusions Initial RT-PCR and chest CT had comparable diagnostic performance in identification of suspected COVID-19 patients outside the epidemic center. To compensate potential risk of false-negative PCR, chest CT should be applied for clinically suspected patients with negative initial RT-PCR.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/j.rmed.2020.105980

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Cited by

See all 281

Metadata

Authors
He, J.-L., Luo, L., Luo, Z.-D., Lyu, J.-X., Ng, M.-Y., Shen, X.-P., & Wen, Z.
Venue
Respiratory Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-07
Volume
168
Pages
105980
ISSN
0954-6111 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3016653598
Cited by
281
References
25
FWCI
8.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diagnostic performance between CT and initial real-time RT-PCR for clinically suspected 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients outside Wuhan, China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rmed.2020.105980
The paper
He, J.-L., Luo, L., Luo, Z.-D., Lyu, J.-X., Ng, M.-Y., Shen, X.-P., & Wen, Z. (2020). Diagnostic performance between CT and initial real-time RT-PCR for clinically suspected 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients outside Wuhan, China. Respiratory Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2020.105980

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.