ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Intra- and Inter-Reader Variations in Lung Nodule Measurements: Influences of Nodule Size, Location, and Observers.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attention-Enhanced Hybrid Bidirectional LSTM and Temporal Convolutional Network for Early Detection of Lung Cancer in Low-Dose CT Scans.Biomedical engineering and computational biology · 2026Article
- Validation of a commercially available CAD-system for lung nodule detection and characterization using CT-scans.European radiology · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice toward lung cancer risk among offspring of lung cancer patients: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Accurate measurement of lung-nodule size is necessary, but whether a three-dimensional volume measurement is better or more reliable than the one-dimensional method is still unclear. This study aimed to investigate the intra- and inter-reader variations according to nodule type, size, three-dimensional volume measurements, and one-dimensional linear measurements. (2) Methods: This retrospective study included computed tomography (CT) examinations of lung nodules and volume measurements performed from October to December 2016. Two radiologists independently performed all measurements. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots were used for analysis. (3) Results: The overall variability in the calculated volume was larger than when using the semiautomatic volume measurement. Nodules <6 mm tended to have larger variability than nodules ≥6 mm in both one-dimensional and calculated volume measurements. The isolated type showed smaller variability in both intra- and inter-reader comparisons. The juxta-vascular type showed the largest variability in both one-dimensional and calculated volume measurements. The variability was decreased when using the 3D volume semiautomated software. (4) Conclusions: The present study suggests that 3D semiautomatic volume measurements showed lower variability than the calculated volume measurement. Nodule size and location influence measurement variability. The intra- and inter-reader variabilities in nodule volume measurement were considerable.
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.