ArticleChest2020
Multidisciplinary Team-Based Management of Incidentally Detected Lung Nodules.
Article in Chest, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of the clinical value of multidisciplinary team-based multimodal interventions in pulmonary nodule management.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Resource Utilization and Timeliness of Care in Patients With Incidentally Detected Lung Nodules.CHEST pulmonary · 2026Article
- Are respiratory physicians adherent to guidelines when evaluating pulmonary nodules?Internal medicine journal · 2026Article
- Pulmonary nodules in Denmark: occurrence, resource use, and risk of lung cancer and death.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- Article
- The TSANZ Practical Guide for Clinicians in the Management of Screen- and Incidentally-Detected Nodules.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2025Review
- The development and application of a novel precise health management model for pulmonary nodules population: a prospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- ACPA is a main risk factor for CT-proven pulmonary nodule progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.Clinical rheumatology · 2025Article
- Radiomics and artificial intelligence for risk stratification of pulmonary nodules: Ready for primetime?Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2025Review
- Article
- Association of patient and health care organization factors with incidental nodule guidelines adherence: A multi-system observational study.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Observational
- Article
- Improvement in Stage of Lung Cancer Diagnosis With Incidental Pulmonary Nodules Followed With a Patient Tracking System and Computerized Registry.JTO clinical and research reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEach year, > 1.5 million Americans are diagnosed with an incidentally detected lung nodule. Practice guidelines attempt to balance the benefit of early detection of lung cancer with the risks of diagnostic testing, but adherence to guidelines is low. The goal of this study was to determine guideline adherence rates in the setting of a multidisciplinary nodule clinic and describe reasons for nonadherence as well as associated outcomes.
methodsThis cohort study included 3 years of follow-up of patients aged ≥ 35 years with an incidentally detected lung nodule evaluated in a multidisciplinary clinic that used the 2005 Fleischner Society Guidelines.
resultsAmong 113 patients, 67% (95% CI, 58-76) were recommended a guideline-concordant nodule evaluation; 7.1% (95% CI, 3.1-13) and 26% (95% CI, 18-25) were recommended less or more intense evaluation, respectively. In contrast, 58% (95% CI, 48-67), 22% (95% CI, 18-25), and 23% (95% CI, 16-32) received a guideline-concordant, less intense, or more intense evaluation. The most common reason for recommending guideline-discordant care was concern for two different diagnoses that would each benefit from early detection and treatment. A majority of lung cancer diagnoses (88%) occurred in patients who received guideline-concordant care. There were no lung cancer cases in those who received less intense nodule care.
conclusionsA multidisciplinary nodule clinic may serve as a system-level intervention to promote guideline-concordant care, while also providing a multidisciplinary basis by which to deviate from guidelines to address the needs of a heterogeneous patient population.
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.