ArticleEuropean radiology2020
Differences in the clinical management of women and men after detection of a solitary pulmonary nodule in clinical practice.
Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inequity in imaging: Why it matters? A statement from the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Subcommittee of the European Society of Radiology.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Young lung cancer: from diagnosis to survivorship.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Article
- Gender Differences in the Impact of Recommendations on Diagnostic Imaging Tests: A Retrospective Study 2007-2021.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Multivariate Analysis on Development of Lung Adenocarcinoma Lesion from Solitary Pulmonary Nodule.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo explore differences in the clinical management of men and women in the 5 years after detecting a solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) by chest radiograph or CT in routine clinical practice.
methodsWe followed up 545 men and 347 women with an SPN detected by chest radiograph or CT in a retrospective cohort of 25,422 individuals undergoing routine thoracic imaging in 2010-2011. We compared the frequency of each management strategy (no further test, immediate intervention or follow up) according to sex by means of chi-squared. We estimated the relative risk of women versus men of having been followed up instead of an immediate intervention using multivariate logistic regression. We compared by sex the time between detection of the nodule and lung cancer diagnosis, the time between diagnosis and death by means of Mann-Whitney U test and the cumulative effective dose of radiation in each management strategy by means of t test.
resultsWomen were more likely than men to have follow-up rather than immediate intervention (aRR = 1.8, CI 1.3-2.7, p = 0.002), particularly in those who underwent CT (aRR = 4.2, CI 1.9-9.3, p < 0.001). The median time between SPN detection and lung cancer diagnosis was higher in women (4.2 months, interquartile range (IQR) 5.1) than in men (1.5 months, IQR 16.2). The mean cumulative effective dose was 21.3 mSv, 19.4 mSv in men and 23.9mv in women (p = 0.023).
conclusionsOur results could reflect decisions based on a greater suspicion of lung cancer in men. The incidental detection of SPNs is increasing, and it is necessary to establish clear strategies aimed to reduce variability in their management according to patient's sex. KEY POINTS: • After incidental finding of SPN, women were less likely to receive an immediate intervention. • Accumulative radiation was higher in women than in men. • Our results could reflect decisions based on a greater suspicion of lung cancer in men.
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.