ReviewThe British journal of radiology2018
Lung cancer screening-low dose CT for lung cancer screening: recent trial results and next steps.
Review in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient and Healthcare Provider Barriers in the LDCT Lung Cancer Screening Continuum.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Observational
- Lung Cancer Screening: Review and 2021 Update.Current pulmonology reports · 2022Review
- CXCL4L1 May Help Differentiate Benign from Malignant Pulmonary Lesions and Predicts Prognosis of Patients with Lung Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2022Article
- Diagnostic and prognostic value of microRNA-2355-3p and contribution to the progression in lung adenocarcinoma.Bioengineered · 2021Article
- An Update on the Use of Exhaled Breath Analysis for the Early Detection of Lung Cancer.Lung Cancer (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Review
- Differences in lung cancer characteristics and mortality rate between screened and non-screened cohorts.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- New recommendation and coverage of low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening: uptake has increased but is still low.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Screening for lung cancer using low-dose CT has already been implemented in North America following the results of the National Lung Screening Trial. Outside North America, clinicians and researchers are addressing issues that may have a major impact on the success of screening programmes by reviewing results of existing trials and by designing new research and pilot programmes. This review summarizes the work that has been done to try to answer the remaining questions and highlights potential barriers which may affect screening uptake and cost-effectiveness.
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.