ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2015
Improving lung cancer outcomes by improving the quality of surgical care.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of lymph node evaluation standard in patients undergoing lung resection for clinical stage IA pulmonary adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Surgeon Quality and Patient Survival After Resection for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Association Between Surgical Quality Metric Adherence and Overall Survival Among US Veterans With Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.JAMA surgery · 2023Article
- Technical Standards for Cancer Surgery: Commission on Cancer Standards 5.3-5.8.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Review
- Article
- Utility of the surgical Apgar score for predicting the short- and long-term outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer patients who undergo surgery.Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Institutional-Level Differences in Quality and Outcomes of Lung Cancer Resections in the United States.Chest · 2021Article
- Volume-Based Care Regionalization: Pitfalls and Challenges.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020Article
- ERAS in VATS-do we really need to follow the trend?Translational lung cancer research · 2019Article
- Positive Surgical Margins in the 10 Most Common Solid Cancers.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Patients reported outcomes in thoracic surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Article
- One, two, three or four ports… does it matter? Priorities in lung cancer surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2016Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Surgical resection remains the most important curative treatment modality for non-small cell lung cancer, but variations in short- and long-term surgical outcomes jeopardize the benefit of surgery for certain patients, operated on by certain types of surgeons, at certain types of institutions. We discuss current understanding of surgical quality measures, and their role in promoting understanding of the causes of outcome disparities after lung cancer surgery. We also discuss the use of minimally invasive surgical resection approaches to expand the playing field for surgery in lung cancer care, and end with a discussion of the future role of surgery in a world of alternative treatment possibilities.
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.