Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27759428›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2016

Comparison of digital tomosynthesis and chest radiography for the detection of pulmonary nodules: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jun H Kim, Kyung H Lee, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Hyun J Kim, Hyeong S Ahn, Yeo J Kim, Ha Y Lee, Yong S Jeon

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Next-generation digital chest tomosynthesis.Journal of clinical imaging science · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jun H Kim1 Department of Radiology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Kyung H Lee1 Department of Radiology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Kyoung-Tae Kim1 Department of Radiology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Hyun J Kim2 Institute for Evidence-based Medicine, Cochrane Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hyeong S Ahn2 Institute for Evidence-based Medicine, Cochrane Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yeo J Kim1 Department of Radiology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Ha Y Lee1 Department of Radiology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Yong S Jeon1 Department of Radiology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of digital tomosynthesis (DTS) with that of chest radiography for the detection of pulmonary nodules by meta-analysis.

methodsA systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant original studies from 1 January 1 1976 to 31 August 31 2016. The quality of included studies was assessed by quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2. Per-patient data were used to calculate the sensitivity and specificity and per-lesion data were used to calculate the detection rate. Summary receiver-operating characteristic curves were drawn for pulmonary nodule detection.

results16 studies met the inclusion criteria. 1017 patients on a per-patient basis and 2159 lesions on a per-lesion basis from 16 eligible studies were evaluated. The pooled patient-based sensitivity of DTS was 0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-0.88] and the specificity was 0.95 (0.93-0.96). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of chest radiography were 0.47 (0.44-0.51) and 0.37 (0.34-0.40), respectively. The per-lesion detection rate was 2.90 (95% CI 2.63-3.19).

conclusionDTS has higher diagnostic accuracy than chest radiography for detection of pulmonary nodules. Chest radiography has low sensitivity but similar specificity, comparable with that of DTS. Advances in knowledge: DTS has higher diagnostic accuracy than chest radiography for the detection of pulmonary nodules.

Indexed as

HumansLungLung NeoplasmsMultiple Pulmonary NodulesRadiography, ThoracicReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID27759428
PMCPMC5604914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.