ReviewWorld journal of radiology2014
Lung cancer screening-don't forget the chest radiograph.
Review in World journal of radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
- Cost-effectiveness of chest radiography using artificial intelligence for lung cancer screening in South Korea.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence software for detecting unsuspected lung cancer on chest radiographs in an asymptomatic population.Radiology advances · 2025Article
- IVC filter - assessing the readability and quality of patient information on the Internet.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2024Review
- Role of chest radiographs in early lung cancer detection.Translational lung cancer research · 2020Article
- Is chest X-ray screening for lung cancer in smokers cost-effective? Evidence from a population-based study in Italy.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer is a major health burden and early detection only bears the possibility of curative treatment. Screening with computed tomography (CT) recently demonstrated a mortality reduction in selected patients and has been incorporated in clinical guidelines. Problems of screening with CT are the excessive number of false positive findings, costs, radiation burden and from a global point of view shortage of CT capacity. In contrast, chest radiography could be an ideal screening tool in the early detection of lung cancer. It is widely available, easy to perform, cheap, the radiation burden is negligible and there is only a low rate of false positive findings. Large randomized controlled trials could not show a mortality reduction, but different large population-based cohort studies have shown a lung cancer mortality reduction. It has been argued that community-based cohort studies are more closely reflecting the "real world" of everyday medicine. Radiologists should be aware of the found mortality reduction and realize that early detection of lung cancer is possible when reading their daily chest radiographs. Offering a chest radiograph in selected scenarios for the early detection of lung cancer is therefore still justified.
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.