Comparing Visual and Software-Based Quantitative Assessment Scores of Lung Parenchymal Involvement Quantification in COVID-19 Patients

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0

Abstract

BACKGROUND. Computed tomography (CT) plays a paramount role in the characterization and follow-up of Covid-19. Several scoring systems have been implemented to properly assess the lung parenchyma involved in patients suffering from Sars-Cov-2 infection, such as visual quantitative assessment score (VQAS) and software-based quantitative assessment score (SBQAS). PURPOSE. This study aims to compare VQAS and SBQAS with two different software. MATERIAL AND METHODS. This was a retrospective study; 90 patients were enrolled with the following criteria: patients’ age more than 18 years old, positive test for Covid-19, and unenhanced chest CT scans obtained between March and June 2021. The VQAS was independently assessed, and the SBQAS was performed with two different Artificial Intelligence-driven softwares (Icolung and CT-COPD). The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) statistical index and Bland-Altman test were employed. RESULTS. The agreement score between radiologists (R1 and R2) for the VQAS of the lung parenchyma involved in the CT images was good (ICC = 0.871). The agreement score between the two software applications for the SBQAS was moderate (ICC = 0.584). The accordance between Icolung and the median of the visual evaluations (Median R1-R2) is good (ICC = 0.885). The correspondence between CT-COPD and the median of the VQAS (Median R1-R2) is moderate (ICC = 0.622). CONCLUSION. This study showed moderate and good agreement regarding the VQAS and the SBQAS, enhancing this approach as a valuable tool to manage Covid-19 patients.
Full text 621 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version {{ publication.field_name }} {{ publication.subfield_name }} Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information. Listen on

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-29T02:00:03.542394+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0