Erratum to virtual or reality: divergence between preprocedural computed tomography scans and lung anatomy during guided bronchoscopy.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Prone positioning in cone beam CT-guided robotic bronchoscopy case series: a strategy to minimize atelectasis and improve access to posteromedial lower lobe nodules.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025
   Article
2. VirtualJournal of thoracic disease · 2025
   Article
3. Efficacy and Safety of Cone-Beam CT Augmented Electromagnetic Navigation Guided Bronchoscopic Biopsies of Indeterminate Pulmonary Nodules.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Virtual or reality: divergence between preprocedural computed tomography scans and lung anatomy during guided bronchoscopy.2020

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract