Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18665179›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of cancer2008

Lung cancer screening: the way forward.

J K Field, S W Duffy

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the baseline findings of randomized controlled trials.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2010
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Apoptosis Effect of Girinimbine Isolated from Murraya koenigii on Lung Cancer Cells In Vitro.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2013
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J K FieldDepartment of Surgery and Oncology, Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, Liverpool L3 9TA, UK. J.K.Field@liv.ac.uk
S W Duffy
Cancer Research UK · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To take lung cancer screening into national programmes, we first have to answer the question whether low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening and treatment of early lesions will decrease lung cancer mortality compared with a control group, to accurately estimate the balance of benefits and harms, and to determine the cost-effectiveness of the intervention.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisHumansLung NeoplasmsMass Chest X-RayNational Health ProgramsSurvival RateTomography, X-Ray ComputedUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID18665179
PMCPMC2527832
OpenAlexW2042893811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.