Journals / Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology / 2021 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 5

Diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement of CO-RADS: evaluation of classification in radiology practice

Pages
615–620
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

A reliable prediction on the basis of RT-PCR and clinical findings indicated the mean area under the curve (AUC) of Fleiss’ κ value as 0.89 (95% CI 0.708–0.990).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:PURPOSE We aimed to evaluate the use of the COVID-19 reporting and data system (CO-RADS) among radiologists and the diagnostic performance of this system.
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS Four radiologists retrospectively evaluated the chest CT examinations of 178 patients.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:A reliable prediction on the basis of RT-PCR and clinical findings indicated the mean area under the curve (AUC) of Fleiss’ κ value as 0.89 (95% CI 0.708–0.990).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

PURPOSE We aimed to evaluate the use of the COVID-19 reporting and data system (CO-RADS) among radiologists and the diagnostic performance of this system. METHODS Four radiologists retrospectively evaluated the chest CT examinations of 178 patients. The study included 143 patients with positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test results and 35 patients whose RT-PCR tests were negative but whose clinical and/or radiological findings were consistent with COVID-19. Fleiss’ kappa (κ) values were calculated, and individual observers’ scores were compared. To investigate diagnostic efficiency, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for each interpreter. RESULTS The interpreters were in full agreement on 574 of 712 (80.6%) evaluations. The common Fleiss’ κ value of all the radiologists combined was 0.712 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692–0.769). A reliable prediction on the basis of RT-PCR and clinical findings indicated the mean area under the curve (AUC) of Fleiss’ κ value as 0.89 (95% CI 0.708–0.990). General interpreter agreement was found to range from moderate to good. CONCLUSION The interpreter agreement for CO-RADS categories 1 and 5 was reasonably good. We conclude that this scoring system will make a valuable contribution to efforts in COVID-19 diagnosis. CO-RADS can also be of significant value for the diagnosis and treatment of the disease in cases with false-negative PCR results.

🔖

Cite This Article

DİLEK, O., KAYA, Ö., AKKAYA, H., CEYLAN, C., KIZILOĞLU, A., EKER, B. Ş., GÜLEK, B. (2021). Diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement of CO-RADS: evaluation of classification in radiology practice. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 5, 615–620. https://ajindex.com/articles/383569

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Zu ZY, Jiang MD, Xu PP, et al. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a perspective from China. Radiology 2020
  2. 15–25. [Crossref] 2. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, et al. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med 2020
  3. 727–733. [Crossref] 3. Xu Z, Shi L, Wang Y, et al. Pathological findings of COVID-19 associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Lancet Respir Med 2020
  4. 420–422. [Crossref] 4. Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult in patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2020
  5. 1054–1062. [Crossref] 5. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill 2020
  6. 2000045. [Crossref] 6. Ai T, Yang Z, Hou H, et al. Correlation of chest CT and RT-PCR testing in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: a report of 1014 cases. Radiology 2020
  7. 32–40. [Crossref] 7. Fang Y, Zhang H, Xie J, et al. Sensitivity of chest CT for COVID-19: comparison to RT-PCR. Radiology 2020
  8. 115–117. [Crossref] 8. Wu J, Wu X, Zeng W, et al. Chest CT findings in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and its relationship with clinical features. Invest Radiol 2020
  9. 257–261. [Crossref] 9. Long C, Xu H, Shen Q, et al. Diagnosis of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19): rRT-PCR or CT? Eur J Radiol 2020
  10. 108961. [Online ahead of print] [Crossref] 10. Simpson S, Kay FU, Abbara S, et al. Radiological Society of North America Expert Consensus Statement on reporting chest CT findings related to COVID-19. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2020:e200152. [Crossref] 11. Prokop M, van Everdingen W, van Rees Vellinga T, et al. CO-RADS: a categorical CT assessment scheme for patients with suspected COVID-19: definition and evaluation. Radiology 2020
  11. 97–104. [Crossref] 12. Fleiss JL, Cohen J. The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ Psychol Meas 1973
  12. 613–619. [Crossref] 13. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988
  13. 837–845. [Crossref] 14 Li K, Fang Y, Li W, et al. CT image visual quantitative evaluation and clinical classification of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Eur Radiol 2020
  14. 4407–4416. [Crossref] 15. Xu B, Xing Y, Peng J et al. Chest CT for detecting COVID19: a systematic re