Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35415415›Full record

ArticleJournal of healthcare informatics research2018

Estimation of Lead Time via Low-Dose CT in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Ruiqi Liu, Adriana Pérez, Dongfeng Wu

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of healthcare informatics research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. When to initiate cancer screening exam?Statistics and its interface · 2022
    Article
  4. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ruiqi LiuDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Information Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202 USA.
Adriana PérezDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston-UTHealth, School of Public Health, Austin Campus, Austin, TX 78701 USA.
Dongfeng WuDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Information Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6764-0083
University of Louisville · USUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Dallas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Based on recent reports from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), smokers who were screened by low-dose computer tomography (LDCT) had a 20% lower chance of dying from lung cancer than those screened by chest X-rays. However, due to the complexities of lead time bias and over diagnosis, no formal test has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality. To correctly evaluate survival benefit due to early detection, it is critical to estimate lead time, the length of time that detection of a disease is advanced by screening. We applied a recently developed probability method to estimate lead time, using the LDCT data from NLST, where human lifetime was treated as random and derived from the actuarial life table of the US Social Security Administration. Using Bayesian posterior samples of key parameters extracted from the NLST-LDCT data, simulations on lead time were carried out on 16 hypothetical cohorts with four initial ages (55, 60, 65, and 70) and four future screening intervals (12, 18, 24, and 30 months). For each scenario, the estimated lead time for both screen-detected and interval cases is reported. Results show that the probability of no-early-detection (interval cases) increases monotonically when the screening interval increases for both genders. A male heavy smoker with an initial screening age at 60 has 11.65% (female 6.76%) chance of no-early-detection with annual screenings. This probability increases to 36.35% (female 28.26%) if the screenings were biennial. The mean lead time appears longer for women than for men. The mean lead time decreases when the screening interval increases, but it appears stable across different initial age groups. These results lay a foundation to evaluate survival benefit accurately with LDCT and to schedule future screening exams.

Indexed as

Cancer screeningLow-dose computed tomographyNational Lung Screening TrialNo-early-detection

Identifiers

PMID35415415
PMCPMC8982711
OpenAlexW2808504929

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.