Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37404849›Full record

ReviewERJ open research2023

Exploring computer-based imaging analysis in interstitial lung disease: opportunities and challenges.

Federico N Felder, Simon L F Walsh

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ERJ open research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Radiomics and Artificial Intelligence in Pulmonary Fibrosis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Biomarkers in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: Current insight and future direction.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2024
    Article
  14. Advancing Drug Development in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Tomorrow Is Now.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2024
    Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Federico N FelderNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Simon L F WalshNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Imperial College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and artificial intelligence (AI) using high-resolution computed tomography data has revolutionised the way interstitial diseases are studied. These quantitative methods provide more accurate and precise results compared to prior semiquantitative methods, which were limited by human error such as interobserver disagreement or low reproducibility. The integration of QCT and AI and the development of digital biomarkers has facilitated not only diagnosis but also prognostication and prediction of disease behaviour, not just in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in which they were initially studied, but also in other fibrotic lung diseases. These tools provide reproducible, objective prognostic information which may facilitate clinical decision-making. However, despite the benefits of QCT and AI, there are still obstacles that need to be addressed. Important issues include optimal data management, data sharing and maintenance of data privacy. In addition, the development of explainable AI will be essential to develop trust within the medical community and facilitate implementation in routine clinical practice.

Identifiers

PMID37404849
PMCPMC10316044
OpenAlexW4377019614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.