Computed tomographic screening for lung cancer.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Osteoporosis markers on low-dose lung cancer screening chest computed tomography scans predict all-cause mortality.European radiology · 2015
   Trial
2. Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death.The New England journal of medicine · 2013
   Trial
3. Reduced Expiratory Flow Rate among Heavy Smokers Increases Lung Cancer Risk. Results from the National Lung Screening Trial-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cohort.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2017
   Article
4. Airflow Limitation and Histology Shift in the National Lung Screening Trial. The NLST-ACRIN Cohort Substudy.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2015
   Article
5. Lung cancer screening: identifying the high risk cohort.Journal of thoracic disease · 2015
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review.2012

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as