Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32847558›Full record

ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2020

Lack of benefit from low dose computed tomography in screening for lung cancer - comment on paper by Huang K-L et al.

Don Benjamin

Open access · goldAbstract readLetterComment
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2020. 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, top 83% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Don BenjaminCancer Information & Support Society, 6/56 Chandos St, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. don.benjamin@bigpond.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2330-8772
Cancer Council Australia · AU

Funding

CSRD VA 1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The article by Huang K-L et al. Effects of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer contains a conclusion that is not consistent with the data presented. With reference to the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) there are several flaws in the methodology overlooked. Also there is no significant reduction in deaths from all causes following the screening. Therefore any claim that the LDCT screening is superior to usual care is invalid.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsHumansMass ScreeningTomography, X-Ray ComputedLow dose computed tomographyLung cancer screeningMethodology

Identifiers

PMID32847558
PMCPMC7450544
OpenAlexW3081114710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.