ReviewThe British journal of radiology2018
Quality assurance and quantitative imaging biomarkers in low-dose CT lung cancer screening.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies for sustainable lung cancer screening: a multi-faceted perspective to long-term surveillance in SOLACE.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- CT acquisition protocols in lung cancer screening: implications for guideline development from a worldwide survey.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Lung cancer screening with AI can discover cures for many early diseases. A public utility can make sure it happens.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Structured narrative review on lung cancer screening: current evidence, clinical practice implications and implementation insights from a multidisciplinary task force and patient representatives.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Review
- CT acquisition protocols for lung cancer screening-current landscape and the urgent need for consistency.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Contemporary issues in the implementation of lung cancer screening.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2021Review
- QIBA guidance: Computed tomography imaging for COVID-19 quantitative imaging applications.Clinical imaging · 2021Article
- The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Early Lung Imaging Confederation.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2020Article
- Implementation of lung cancer screening in Europe: challenges and potential solutions: summary of a multidisciplinary roundtable discussion.ESMO open · 2019Review
- Status of lung cancer screening.Journal of thoracic disease · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After years of assessment through controlled clinical trials, low-dose CT screening for lung cancer is becoming part of clinical practice. As with any cancer screening test, those undergoing lung cancer screening are not being evaluated for concerning signs or symptoms, but are generally in good health and proactively trying to prevent premature death. Given the resultant obligation to achieve the screening aim of early diagnosis while also minimizing the potential for morbidity from workup of indeterminate but ultimately benign screening abnormalities, careful implementation of screening with conformance to currently recognized best practices and a focus on quality assurance is essential. In this review, we address the importance of each component of the screening process to optimize the effectiveness of CT screening, discussing options for quality assurance at each step. We also discuss the potential added advantages, quality assurance requirements and current status of quantitative imaging biomarkers related to lung cancer screening. Finally, we highlight suggestions for improvements and needs for further evidence in evaluating the performance of CT screening as it transitions from the research trial setting into daily clinical practice.
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.