Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of physician lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for pneumonia diagnosis in a peri-urban South African cohort
Background Lung ultrasound (US), which is radiation-free and cheaper than chest radiography (CXR), may be a useful modality for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia, but there are limited data from low- and middle-income countries. Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic perf...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Pediatric radiology 2024-03, Vol.54 (3), p.413-424 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 424 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 413 |
| container_title | Pediatric radiology |
| container_volume | 54 |
| creator | Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B. Stadler, Jacob A. M. Kilborn, Tracy le Roux, David M. Zar, Heather J. Andronikou, Savvas |
| description | Background
Lung ultrasound (US), which is radiation-free and cheaper than chest radiography (CXR), may be a useful modality for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia, but there are limited data from low- and middle-income countries.
Objectives
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of non-radiologist, physician-performed lung US compared to CXR for pneumonia in children in a resource-constrained, African setting.
Materials and methods
Children under 5 years of age enrolled in a South African birth cohort study, the Drakenstein Child Health Study, who presented with clinically defined pneumonia and had a CXR performed also had a lung US performed by a study doctor. Each modality was reported by two readers, using standardized methodology. Agreement between modalities, accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of lung US and inter-rater agreement were assessed. Either consolidation or any abnormality (consolidation or interstitial picture) was considered as endpoints. In the 98 included cases (median age: 7.2 months; 53% male; 69% hospitalized), prevalence was 37% vs. 39% for consolidation and 52% vs. 76% for any abnormality on lung US and CXR, respectively. Agreement between modalities was poor for consolidation (observed agreement=61%, Kappa=0.18, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: − 0.02 to 0.37) and for any abnormality (observed agreement=56%, Kappa=0.10, 95% CI: − 0.07 to 0.28). Using CXR as the reference standard, sensitivity of lung US was low for consolidation (47%, 95% CI: 31–64%) or any abnormality (5%, 95% CI: 43–67%), while specificity was moderate for consolidation (70%, 95% CI: 57–81%), but lower for any abnormality (58%, 95% CI: 37–78%). Overall inter-observer agreement of CXR was poor (Kappa=0.25, 95% CI: 0.11–0.37) and was significantly lower than the substantial agreement of lung US (Kappa=0.61, 95% CI: 0.50–0.75). Lung US demonstrated better agreement than CXR for all categories of findings, showing a significant difference for consolidation (Kappa=0.72, 95% CI: 0.58–0.86 vs. 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13–0.51).
Conclusion
Lung US identified consolidation with similar frequency to CXR, but there was poor agreement between modalities. The significantly higher inter-observer agreement of LUS compared to CXR supports the utilization of lung US by clinicians in a low-resource setting.
Graphical Abstract |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00247-023-05686-7 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2825809986</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2932780208</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-fdb0a5199f08583eb1fba589b9cf85f118b2cc4a1b734342e5431830ed2c69f23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9uFSEYxYmpsX_0BVwYkm7cTP2A4cIsm6baJk1cqGvCMHCHZgZGGJr0WXzZcr2tNl10BeT7nQOHg9BHAmcEQHzJALQVDVDWAN_ITSPeoCPSMtqQrpMHz_aH6DjnWwBgnLB36JAJRojsxBH6c3mnp6JXHwOODq-jxYPX2xDz6g1ebHIxzToYu5su4332xuuApxK2uExr0jmWMOA7m3LJ2Iw2rzjpwcdt0hXHVY6XYMscg9dP1j5jH7De2fumpL4a_ohlHfG5S97Uk4ljTOt79NbpKdsPj-sJ-vX18ufFVXPz_dv1xflNY5jga-OGHjSvMR1ILpnties1l13fGSe5q0F7akyrSS9Yy1pqecuIZGAHajado-wEfd77Lin-LjWBmn02dpp0sLFkRSXlEuo3bip6-gK9jSWF-jpFO0aFBAqyUnRPmRRzTtapJflZp3tFQO2qU_vqVK1O_a1OiSr69Ghd-tkO_yRPXVWA7YFcR2Fr0_-7X7F9AJ9fp2I</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2932780208</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of physician lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for pneumonia diagnosis in a peri-urban South African cohort</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B. ; Stadler, Jacob A. M. ; Kilborn, Tracy ; le Roux, David M. ; Zar, Heather J. ; Andronikou, Savvas</creator><creatorcontrib>Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B. ; Stadler, Jacob A. M. ; Kilborn, Tracy ; le Roux, David M. ; Zar, Heather J. ; Andronikou, Savvas</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Lung ultrasound (US), which is radiation-free and cheaper than chest radiography (CXR), may be a useful modality for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia, but there are limited data from low- and middle-income countries.
Objectives
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of non-radiologist, physician-performed lung US compared to CXR for pneumonia in children in a resource-constrained, African setting.
Materials and methods
Children under 5 years of age enrolled in a South African birth cohort study, the Drakenstein Child Health Study, who presented with clinically defined pneumonia and had a CXR performed also had a lung US performed by a study doctor. Each modality was reported by two readers, using standardized methodology. Agreement between modalities, accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of lung US and inter-rater agreement were assessed. Either consolidation or any abnormality (consolidation or interstitial picture) was considered as endpoints. In the 98 included cases (median age: 7.2 months; 53% male; 69% hospitalized), prevalence was 37% vs. 39% for consolidation and 52% vs. 76% for any abnormality on lung US and CXR, respectively. Agreement between modalities was poor for consolidation (observed agreement=61%, Kappa=0.18, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: − 0.02 to 0.37) and for any abnormality (observed agreement=56%, Kappa=0.10, 95% CI: − 0.07 to 0.28). Using CXR as the reference standard, sensitivity of lung US was low for consolidation (47%, 95% CI: 31–64%) or any abnormality (5%, 95% CI: 43–67%), while specificity was moderate for consolidation (70%, 95% CI: 57–81%), but lower for any abnormality (58%, 95% CI: 37–78%). Overall inter-observer agreement of CXR was poor (Kappa=0.25, 95% CI: 0.11–0.37) and was significantly lower than the substantial agreement of lung US (Kappa=0.61, 95% CI: 0.50–0.75). Lung US demonstrated better agreement than CXR for all categories of findings, showing a significant difference for consolidation (Kappa=0.72, 95% CI: 0.58–0.86 vs. 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13–0.51).
Conclusion
Lung US identified consolidation with similar frequency to CXR, but there was poor agreement between modalities. The significantly higher inter-observer agreement of LUS compared to CXR supports the utilization of lung US by clinicians in a low-resource setting.
Graphical Abstract</description><identifier>ISSN: 1432-1998</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0301-0449</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1998</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00247-023-05686-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37311897</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Chest ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Children ; Cohort Studies ; Consolidation ; Diagnosis ; Diagnostic systems ; Female ; Global Paediatric Radiology ; Humans ; Imaging ; Infant ; Lung - diagnostic imaging ; Lung Diseases ; Lungs ; Male ; Medical personnel ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Neuroradiology ; Nuclear Medicine ; Oncology ; Pediatrics ; Performance evaluation ; Physicians ; Pneumonia ; Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging ; Prospective Studies ; Radiography ; Radiography, Thoracic - methods ; Radiology ; South Africa ; Ultrasonic imaging ; Ultrasonography - methods ; Ultrasound</subject><ispartof>Pediatric radiology, 2024-03, Vol.54 (3), p.413-424</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-fdb0a5199f08583eb1fba589b9cf85f118b2cc4a1b734342e5431830ed2c69f23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-fdb0a5199f08583eb1fba589b9cf85f118b2cc4a1b734342e5431830ed2c69f23</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1803-1740 ; 0000-0003-1977-3700 ; 0000-0002-1015-9790 ; 0000-0003-1704-5208 ; 0000-0003-1418-4229 ; 0000-0002-9046-759X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00247-023-05686-7$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00247-023-05686-7$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37311897$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stadler, Jacob A. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kilborn, Tracy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>le Roux, David M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zar, Heather J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andronikou, Savvas</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of physician lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for pneumonia diagnosis in a peri-urban South African cohort</title><title>Pediatric radiology</title><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><description>Background
Lung ultrasound (US), which is radiation-free and cheaper than chest radiography (CXR), may be a useful modality for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia, but there are limited data from low- and middle-income countries.
Objectives
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of non-radiologist, physician-performed lung US compared to CXR for pneumonia in children in a resource-constrained, African setting.
Materials and methods
Children under 5 years of age enrolled in a South African birth cohort study, the Drakenstein Child Health Study, who presented with clinically defined pneumonia and had a CXR performed also had a lung US performed by a study doctor. Each modality was reported by two readers, using standardized methodology. Agreement between modalities, accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of lung US and inter-rater agreement were assessed. Either consolidation or any abnormality (consolidation or interstitial picture) was considered as endpoints. In the 98 included cases (median age: 7.2 months; 53% male; 69% hospitalized), prevalence was 37% vs. 39% for consolidation and 52% vs. 76% for any abnormality on lung US and CXR, respectively. Agreement between modalities was poor for consolidation (observed agreement=61%, Kappa=0.18, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: − 0.02 to 0.37) and for any abnormality (observed agreement=56%, Kappa=0.10, 95% CI: − 0.07 to 0.28). Using CXR as the reference standard, sensitivity of lung US was low for consolidation (47%, 95% CI: 31–64%) or any abnormality (5%, 95% CI: 43–67%), while specificity was moderate for consolidation (70%, 95% CI: 57–81%), but lower for any abnormality (58%, 95% CI: 37–78%). Overall inter-observer agreement of CXR was poor (Kappa=0.25, 95% CI: 0.11–0.37) and was significantly lower than the substantial agreement of lung US (Kappa=0.61, 95% CI: 0.50–0.75). Lung US demonstrated better agreement than CXR for all categories of findings, showing a significant difference for consolidation (Kappa=0.72, 95% CI: 0.58–0.86 vs. 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13–0.51).
Conclusion
Lung US identified consolidation with similar frequency to CXR, but there was poor agreement between modalities. The significantly higher inter-observer agreement of LUS compared to CXR supports the utilization of lung US by clinicians in a low-resource setting.
Graphical Abstract</description><subject>Chest</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Child, Preschool</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Consolidation</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Global Paediatric Radiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Lung - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Lung Diseases</subject><subject>Lungs</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Neuroradiology</subject><subject>Nuclear Medicine</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Pneumonia</subject><subject>Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Radiography, Thoracic - methods</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>South Africa</subject><subject>Ultrasonic imaging</subject><subject>Ultrasonography - methods</subject><subject>Ultrasound</subject><issn>1432-1998</issn><issn>0301-0449</issn><issn>1432-1998</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9uFSEYxYmpsX_0BVwYkm7cTP2A4cIsm6baJk1cqGvCMHCHZgZGGJr0WXzZcr2tNl10BeT7nQOHg9BHAmcEQHzJALQVDVDWAN_ITSPeoCPSMtqQrpMHz_aH6DjnWwBgnLB36JAJRojsxBH6c3mnp6JXHwOODq-jxYPX2xDz6g1ebHIxzToYu5su4332xuuApxK2uExr0jmWMOA7m3LJ2Iw2rzjpwcdt0hXHVY6XYMscg9dP1j5jH7De2fumpL4a_ohlHfG5S97Uk4ljTOt79NbpKdsPj-sJ-vX18ufFVXPz_dv1xflNY5jga-OGHjSvMR1ILpnties1l13fGSe5q0F7akyrSS9Yy1pqecuIZGAHajado-wEfd77Lin-LjWBmn02dpp0sLFkRSXlEuo3bip6-gK9jSWF-jpFO0aFBAqyUnRPmRRzTtapJflZp3tFQO2qU_vqVK1O_a1OiSr69Ghd-tkO_yRPXVWA7YFcR2Fr0_-7X7F9AJ9fp2I</recordid><startdate>20240301</startdate><enddate>20240301</enddate><creator>Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.</creator><creator>Stadler, Jacob A. M.</creator><creator>Kilborn, Tracy</creator><creator>le Roux, David M.</creator><creator>Zar, Heather J.</creator><creator>Andronikou, Savvas</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1803-1740</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1977-3700</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1015-9790</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1704-5208</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1418-4229</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9046-759X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240301</creationdate><title>Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of physician lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for pneumonia diagnosis in a peri-urban South African cohort</title><author>Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B. ; Stadler, Jacob A. M. ; Kilborn, Tracy ; le Roux, David M. ; Zar, Heather J. ; Andronikou, Savvas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-fdb0a5199f08583eb1fba589b9cf85f118b2cc4a1b734342e5431830ed2c69f23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Chest</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Child, Preschool</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Consolidation</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Global Paediatric Radiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Lung - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Lung Diseases</topic><topic>Lungs</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Neuroradiology</topic><topic>Nuclear Medicine</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Pneumonia</topic><topic>Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Radiography, Thoracic - methods</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>South Africa</topic><topic>Ultrasonic imaging</topic><topic>Ultrasonography - methods</topic><topic>Ultrasound</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stadler, Jacob A. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kilborn, Tracy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>le Roux, David M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zar, Heather J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andronikou, Savvas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Pediatric radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.</au><au>Stadler, Jacob A. M.</au><au>Kilborn, Tracy</au><au>le Roux, David M.</au><au>Zar, Heather J.</au><au>Andronikou, Savvas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of physician lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for pneumonia diagnosis in a peri-urban South African cohort</atitle><jtitle>Pediatric radiology</jtitle><stitle>Pediatr Radiol</stitle><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><date>2024-03-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>413</spage><epage>424</epage><pages>413-424</pages><issn>1432-1998</issn><issn>0301-0449</issn><eissn>1432-1998</eissn><abstract>Background
Lung ultrasound (US), which is radiation-free and cheaper than chest radiography (CXR), may be a useful modality for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia, but there are limited data from low- and middle-income countries.
Objectives
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of non-radiologist, physician-performed lung US compared to CXR for pneumonia in children in a resource-constrained, African setting.
Materials and methods
Children under 5 years of age enrolled in a South African birth cohort study, the Drakenstein Child Health Study, who presented with clinically defined pneumonia and had a CXR performed also had a lung US performed by a study doctor. Each modality was reported by two readers, using standardized methodology. Agreement between modalities, accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of lung US and inter-rater agreement were assessed. Either consolidation or any abnormality (consolidation or interstitial picture) was considered as endpoints. In the 98 included cases (median age: 7.2 months; 53% male; 69% hospitalized), prevalence was 37% vs. 39% for consolidation and 52% vs. 76% for any abnormality on lung US and CXR, respectively. Agreement between modalities was poor for consolidation (observed agreement=61%, Kappa=0.18, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: − 0.02 to 0.37) and for any abnormality (observed agreement=56%, Kappa=0.10, 95% CI: − 0.07 to 0.28). Using CXR as the reference standard, sensitivity of lung US was low for consolidation (47%, 95% CI: 31–64%) or any abnormality (5%, 95% CI: 43–67%), while specificity was moderate for consolidation (70%, 95% CI: 57–81%), but lower for any abnormality (58%, 95% CI: 37–78%). Overall inter-observer agreement of CXR was poor (Kappa=0.25, 95% CI: 0.11–0.37) and was significantly lower than the substantial agreement of lung US (Kappa=0.61, 95% CI: 0.50–0.75). Lung US demonstrated better agreement than CXR for all categories of findings, showing a significant difference for consolidation (Kappa=0.72, 95% CI: 0.58–0.86 vs. 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13–0.51).
Conclusion
Lung US identified consolidation with similar frequency to CXR, but there was poor agreement between modalities. The significantly higher inter-observer agreement of LUS compared to CXR supports the utilization of lung US by clinicians in a low-resource setting.
Graphical Abstract</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>37311897</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00247-023-05686-7</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1803-1740</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1977-3700</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1015-9790</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1704-5208</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1418-4229</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9046-759X</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1432-1998 |
| ispartof | Pediatric radiology, 2024-03, Vol.54 (3), p.413-424 |
| issn | 1432-1998 0301-0449 1432-1998 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2825809986 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
| subjects | Chest Child Child, Preschool Children Cohort Studies Consolidation Diagnosis Diagnostic systems Female Global Paediatric Radiology Humans Imaging Infant Lung - diagnostic imaging Lung Diseases Lungs Male Medical personnel Medicine Medicine & Public Health Neuroradiology Nuclear Medicine Oncology Pediatrics Performance evaluation Physicians Pneumonia Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging Prospective Studies Radiography Radiography, Thoracic - methods Radiology South Africa Ultrasonic imaging Ultrasonography - methods Ultrasound |
| title | Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of physician lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for pneumonia diagnosis in a peri-urban South African cohort |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T06%3A17%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20the%20diagnostic%20performance%20of%20physician%20lung%20ultrasound%20versus%20chest%20radiography%20for%20pneumonia%20diagnosis%20in%20a%20peri-urban%20South%20African%20cohort&rft.jtitle=Pediatric%20radiology&rft.au=Venkatakrishna,%20Shyam%20Sunder%20B.&rft.date=2024-03-01&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=413&rft.epage=424&rft.pages=413-424&rft.issn=1432-1998&rft.eissn=1432-1998&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00247-023-05686-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2932780208%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2932780208&rft_id=info:pmid/37311897&rfr_iscdi=true |