Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1007/s00330-020-06934-2

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1007/s00330-020-06934-2
suck pdf from google scholar
C7227176!7227176!32415585
unlimited free pdf from europmc32415585    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi


Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
pmid32415585      Eur+Radiol 2020 ; 30 (10): 5720-7
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Chest CT for detecting COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy #MMPMID32415585
  • Xu B; Xing Y; Peng J; Zheng Z; Tang W; Sun Y; Xu C; Peng F
  • Eur Radiol 2020[]; 30 (10): 5720-7 PMID32415585show ga
  • Objective: The purpose of this article was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the diagnostic test accuracy of chest CT for detecting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI were searched up to March 12, 2020. We included studies providing information regarding diagnostic test accuracy of chest CT for COVID-19 detection. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled. Results: Sixteen studies (n?=?3186 patients) were included. The risks of bias in all studies were moderate in general. Pooled sensitivity was 92% (95% CI = 86?96%), and two studies reported specificity (25% [95% CI = 22?30%] and 33% [95% CI = 23?44%], respectively). There was substantial heterogeneity according to Cochran?s Q test (p 
  • ä


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box