ArticleAnnals of the American Thoracic Society2016
What's in a Name? Factors Associated with Documentation and Evaluation of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules.
Article in Annals of the American Thoracic Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Association of patient and health care organization factors with incidental nodule guidelines adherence: A multi-system observational study.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Observational
- Applying a Text-Search Algorithm to Radiology Reports Can Find More Patients With Pulmonary Nodules Than Radiology Coding Alone.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleRadiologist reports of pulmonary nodules discovered incidentally on computed tomographic (CT) images of the chest may influence subsequent evaluation and management.
objectivesWe sought to determine the impact of the terminology used by radiologists to report incidental pulmonary nodules on subsequent documentation and evaluation of the nodules by the ordering or primary care provider.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with incidentally discovered pulmonary nodules detected on CT chest examinations performed during 2010 in a large urban safety net medical system located in northeastern Ohio. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsTwelve different terms were used to describe 344 incidental pulmonary nodules. Most nodules (181 [53%]) were documented in a subsequent progress note by the provider, and 140 (41%) triggered subsequent clinical activity. In a multivariable analysis, incidental pulmonary nodules described in radiology reports using the terms density (odds ratio [OR], 0.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.47), granuloma (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.65), or opacity (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.68) were less likely to be documented by the provider than those that used the term mass. Patients with nodules described in radiology reports using the term nodule (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.02-0.99), nodular density (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.63), granuloma (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.69), or opacity (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.43) were less likely to receive follow-up than were patients with nodules described using the term mass. The factor most strongly associated with follow-up of pulmonary nodules was documentation by the provider (OR, 5.85; 95% CI, 2.93-11.7).
conclusionsWithin one multifacility urban health system in the United States, the terms used by radiologists to describe incidental pulmonary nodules were associated with documentation of the nodule by the ordering physician and subsequent follow-up. Standard terminology should be used to describe pulmonary nodules to improve patient outcomes.
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.