Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28877976›Full record

ReviewEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society2017

Evaluating disease severity in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

Hasti Robbie, Cécile Daccord, Felix Chua, Anand Devaraj

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Hasti RobbieRadiology Dept, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK hasti.robbie@nhs.net.
Cécile DaccordInterstitial Lung Disease Unit, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Felix ChuaInterstitial Lung Disease Unit, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anand DevarajCentre for Academic Radiology, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.
Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Brompton Hospital · GBUniversity Hospital of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate assessment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) disease severity is integral to the care provided to patients with IPF. However, to date, there are no generally accepted or validated staging systems. There is an abundance of data on using information acquired from physiological, radiological and pathological parameters, in isolation or in combination, to assess disease severity in IPF. Recently, there has been interest in using serum biomarkers and computed tomography-derived quantitative lung fibrosis measures to stage disease severity in IPF. This review will focus on the suggested methods for staging IPF, at baseline and on serial assessment, their strengths and limitations, as well as future developments.

Indexed as

LungBiopsyHumansIdiopathic Pulmonary FibrosisMagnetic Resonance ImagingPositron-Emission TomographyPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsRespiratory Function TestsSeverity of Illness IndexTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID28877976
PMCPMC9488723
OpenAlexW2750993488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.