Association of radiologic findings with mortality of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China

  1. Mingli Yuan
  2. Wen Yin
  3. Zhaowu Tao
  4. Weijun Tan
  5. Yi Hu

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.02.22.20024927: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: Patients: This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of Hubei Public Health Clinical Center, the central Hospital of Wuhan, and written informed consent was waived.
    Consent: Patients: This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of Hubei Public Health Clinical Center, the central Hospital of Wuhan, and written informed consent was waived.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analyses were done using the SPSS (version 16.0).
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    There were limitations in our study. First it was a retrospective study including only 27 inpatients, while outpatients and suspected but undiagnosed cases for deficiency of detection kits of 2019-nCoV and potential false negative results were ruled out. Second, not all information was collected because a significant part of patients had not rechecked CT scans. Then, it was pulmonologists, although they are experienced, who evaluated CT images. Finally there was a lack of information regarding interobserver agreement, because the study emphasis on the final consensus interpretation rather than independent reading.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0230548
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.02.22.20024927v1 on medRxiv