Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30542924›Full record

ArticleDer Radiologe2019

[Lung cancer screening].

H Prosch, L Ebner

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Radiologe, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

H ProschUniv. Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Medizinische Universität Wien, Allgemeines Krankenhaus Wien, Währingergürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich. helmut.prosch@meduniwien.ac.at.
L EbnerUniversitätsinstitut für Diagnostische, Interventionelle und Pädiatrische Radiologie (DIPR), Inselspital, Universitätsspital Bern, Bern, Schweiz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical/methodical issueThe National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) in 2011 was able to prove for the first time that screening with a low-dose CT can reduce lung carcinoma mortality by 20%. Despite the positive outcome of the NLST, there is-unlike in the USA-currently no systematic lung cancer screening in Europe. This is partly because several significantly smaller screening studies in Europe failed to show any improvement in lung cancer mortality. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL

methodsOn the other hand, Europe's healthcare systems differ substantially from those in the United States, so that a direct transfer of US experience to Europe is not possible. For this reason, guidelines for lung cancer screening must be developed in the individual European countries to ensure that lung cancer mortality can be reduced by means of a quality-assured and cost-effective lung cancer screening. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: The experience and the expected results of the European screening studies can provide valuable help for these purposes.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsEuropeHumansMass ScreeningUnited StatesCost efficacyHealth care systemsPulmonary nodulesRisk modelsStudy data

Identifiers

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.