ArticleThoracic cancer2016
Status and perspectives of detection by low-dose computed tomography or computed radiography in surgical patients with lung cancer, based on a five-year study.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Necessity of organized low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer: From epidemiologic comparisons between China and the Western nations.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- [Proper Selection of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Programs between the Medical Service and Medical Intervence - Is It Time to Do?]Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2019Review
- [Enhanced Recovery after Surgery from Theory to Practice What do We Need to Do?]Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA retrospective study involving 502 lung cancer patients who had received pulmonary resection from 2009-2013 was conducted in order to compare the clinical characteristics of patients whose diagnosis was detected by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and computed radiography (CR).
methodsTwo groups were established, based on the method of detection: the LDCT group included 172 lung cancer patients; the CR group included 330 lung cancer patients. The evolution of proportions of patients in urban and rural regions was also analyzed, according to detection method.
resultsThe percentage of patients with stage I was higher in the LDCT group than in the CR group (77.3%, 133/172 vs. 53.6%, 177/330). The incidence of postoperative complications within 30 days was significantly lower in the LDCT than in CR group (25.0% vs. 33.6%). The proportion of patients detected by LDCT or CR in urban regions was constantly higher than in rural regions (with an increase of 13.0% vs. 5.9%); the proportion of LDCT-detected patients in urban regions was constantly higher than in rural regions (with an increase of 8.7% vs. 5.9%).
conclusionsLDCT contributes to a higher proportion of early lung cancer diagnoses and a lower incidence of postoperative complications in surgical patients. The proportions of patients detected early and by LDCT have both increased steadily during the last five years. These two trends are more pronounced in urban compared with rural patients.
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.