A head-to-head comparison of the intra- and interobserver agreement of COVID-RADS and CO-RADS grading systems in a population with high estimated prevalence of COVID-19.
Journal
BJR open
ISSN: 2513-9878
Titre abrégé: BJR Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101749810
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
03
09
2020
revised:
15
09
2020
accepted:
16
09
2020
entrez:
28
12
2020
pubmed:
29
12
2020
medline:
29
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate the inter- and intraobserver agreement of COVID-RADS and CO-RADS reporting systems among differently experienced radiologists in a population with high estimated prevalence of COVID-19. Chest CT scans of patients with clinically-epidemiologically diagnosed COVID-19 were retrieved from an open-source MosMedData data set, randomised, and independently assigned COVID-RADS and CO-RADS grades by an abdominal radiology fellow, thoracic imaging fellow and a consultant cardiothoracic radiologist. The inter- and intraobserver agreement of the two systems were assessed using the Fleiss' and Cohen's κ coefficients, respectively. A total of 200 studies were included in the analysis. Both systems demonstrated moderate interobserver agreement, with κ values of 0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.56] and 0.55 (95% CI: 0.50-0.59) for COVID-RADS and CO-RADS, respectively. When COVID-RADS and CO-RADS grades were dichotomised at cut-off values of 2B and 4 to evaluate the agreement between grades representing different levels of clinical suspicion for COVID-19, the interobserver agreement became substantial with κ values of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.66-0.82) for COVID-RADS and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.65-0.81) for CO-RADS. The median intraobserver agreement was considerably higher for CO-RADS reaching 0.81 (95% CI: 0.43-0.76) compared with 0.60 (95% CI: 0.43-0.76) of COVID-RADS. COVID-RADS and CO-RADS showed comparable interobserver agreement, which was moderate when grades were compared head-to-head and substantial when grades were dichotomised to better reflect the underlying levels of suspicion for COVID-19. The median intraobserver agreement of CO-RADS was, however, considerably higher compared with COVID-RADS. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the newly introduced COVID-19 chest CT reporting systems, which will help radiologists of all sub-specialties and experience levels make an informed decision on which system to use in their own practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33367202
doi: 10.1259/bjro.20200053
pmc: PMC7748986
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
20200053Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Published by the British Institute of Radiology.
Références
J Am Coll Radiol. 2020 Jun;17(6):701-709
pubmed: 32283052
Radiology. 2020 Jul;296(1):172-180
pubmed: 32255413
BMJ. 2020 May 12;369:m1808
pubmed: 32398230
Nature. 2020 Aug;584(7820):257-261
pubmed: 32512579
Eur Radiol. 2020 Sep;30(9):4964-4967
pubmed: 32328761
Eur Radiol. 2020 Sep;30(9):4903-4909
pubmed: 32314058
Eur Radiol. 2020 Sep;30(9):4930-4942
pubmed: 32346790
Eur J Radiol. 2020 May;126:108961
pubmed: 32229322
Eur Radiol. 2020 Jun;30(6):3266-3267
pubmed: 32072255
Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E32-E40
pubmed: 32101510
Neuroimage. 2006 Jul 1;31(3):1116-28
pubmed: 16545965
Eur Radiol. 2020 Nov;30(11):6178-6185
pubmed: 32518987
Diagnostics (Basel). 2020 Aug 19;10(9):
pubmed: 32825060
Eur Radiol. 2020 Jul;30(7):3600-3602
pubmed: 32318843
J Thorac Imaging. 2020 Jul;35(4):219-227
pubmed: 32324653
Eur Radiol. 2020 Nov;30(11):6129-6138
pubmed: 32474632
BMJ. 2020 Apr 7;369:m1328
pubmed: 32265220
Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E97-E104
pubmed: 32339082
Radiology. 2021 Jan;298(1):E30-E37
pubmed: 32776832
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Jul;215(1):87-93
pubmed: 32174129
Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E115-E117
pubmed: 32073353
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2020 Jul;26(4):315-322
pubmed: 32558646