ArticleProceedings of the American Thoracic Society2008
The role of NETT in emphysema research.
Article in Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- CT densitometry in emphysema: a systematic review of its clinical utility.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2018Pooled it
- Celebration of the 50-Year Anniversary of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Division of Lung Diseases: A Half-Century of Landmark Clinical Trials.Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (Miami, Fla.) · 2019Review
- Emphysema predicts hospitalisation and incident airflow obstruction among older smokers: a prospective cohort study.PloS one · 2014Article
- Assessment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is one of a long lineage of surgical approaches to emphysema. The reintroduction of this operation in the mid-1990s led to great controversy over the value of the procedure and its long-term outcomes. The National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) represented an historical scientific collaboration of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and the Agency for Health Research and Quality (AHRQ). NETT was designed primarily as a pivotal surgical clinical trial, but also incorporated data collection to inform health policy and cost-benefit analyses. NETT faced challenges that included practical and ethical matters, statistical design and analysis issues, and intense public and political scrutiny. The study design required the development of methods for pulmonary rehabilitation, lung imaging, and exercise testing that have become templates for current clinical and research practice. During the course of the trial, the confidential deliberations of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) played an important role in the ultimate success of the trial and protection of research participants. Because of the importance of the NETT outcomes, the results were disseminated to the medical community and transformed into health policy in a rapid and efficient manner. In many ways, the story of NETT serves as a model for evaluation of new surgical approaches to chronic diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.