Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28434846›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American College of Radiology : JACR2017

Effect of an Automated Tracking Registry on the Rate of Tracking Failure in Incidental Pulmonary Nodules.

Jonathan Shelver, Chris H Wendt, Melissa McClure, Brian Bell, Angela E Fabbrini, Thomas Rector, Kathryn Rice

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Incidental Pulmonary Nodules: What Should We Do in 2026?Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2026
    Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Incidental Pulmonary Nodules - What Do We Know in 2022.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2022
    Review
  7. The Effect of a Dedicated Lung Mass Clinic on Lung Nodule Follow Up.Annals of public health & epidemiology · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

7 authors.

Jonathan ShelverDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Chris H WendtVA Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Department of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Electronic address: wendt005@umn.edu.
Melissa McClureDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Brian BellVA Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Angela E FabbriniVA Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Thomas RectorVA Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Kathryn RiceVA Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Funding

Common Pathogenetic Mechanisms of Lung Cancer and COPDR01HL107612 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI WENDT, CHRIS H, YANG, PING · 2011 to 2014
$2.8M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL107612
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFollowing incidental lung nodules with interval CT scanning is an accepted method to detect early lung cancer, but delayed tracking or failure to track is reported in up to 40% of patients.

methodsOur institution developed and implemented an automated lung nodule registry tracking system. This system uses a code at the time that a suspicious nodule is discovered to populate the registry. Suspicious nodules were defined as any nodule, solid or ground glass, <3 cm that the radiologist recorded as a potential malignancy or recommended for follow-up imaging. We exported the system to eight other Veterans Administration Medical Centers (VAMCs) with over 10,000 patients enrolled. We retrospectively reviewed 200 sequential CT scan reports containing incidental nodule(s) from two tertiary care university-affiliated VAMCs, both before and after the implementation of the registry tracking system. The primary outcome was the rate of tracking failure, defined as suspicious nodules that had no follow-up imaging or whose follow-up was delayed when compared with published guidelines. Secondary outcomes were predictors of tracking failure and reasons for tracking failure.

resultsAfter implementation of the registry tracking system in the two VAMCs, we found a significant decrease in tracking failure, from a preimplementation rate of 74% to a postimplementation rate of 10% (P < .001). We found that age, nodule size, number, and nodule characteristics were significant predictors.

conclusionsThe automated lung nodule registry tracking system can be exported to other health care facilities and significantly reduces the rate of tracking failure.

Indexed as

Incidental FindingsRegistriesTomography, X-Ray ComputedClinical CodingFollow-Up StudiesHospitals, VeteransHumansLung NeoplasmsSolitary Pulmonary Nodulefollow-upincidentalNoduletracking

Identifiers

PMID28434846
PMCPMC8048208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.