ArticleScientific reports2024
LDCT screening results among eligible and ineligible screening candidates in preventive health check-ups population: a real world study in West China.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the LDCT screening results between eligible and ineligible screening candidates in preventive health check-ups population. Using a real-world LDCT screening results among people who took yearly health check-up in health management center of West China Hospital between 2006 and 2017. Objects were classified according to the China National Lung Cancer Screening Guideline with Low-dose Computed Tomography (2018 version) eligibility criteria. Descriptive analysis were performed between eligible and ineligible screening candidates. The proportion of ineligible screening candidates was 64.13% (10,259), and among them there were 4005 (39.04%) subjects with positive screenings, 80 cases had a surgical lung biopsy. Pathology results from lung biopsy revealed 154 cancers (true-positive) and 26 benign results (false-positive), the surgical false-positive biopsy rate was 4.17%, and ineligible group (7.69%) was higher than eligible group (2.47%), P < 0.05. Further, in ineligible screening candidates, the proportion of current smokers was higher among males compared to females (53.85% vs. 4.88%, P < 0.05). Of the 69 lung cancer patients detected in ineligible screening candidates, lung adenocarcinoma accounts for a high proportion of lung cancers both in male (75.00%) and female (85.00%). The proportion of ineligible screening candidates and the surgical false-positive biopsy rate in ineligible candidates were both high in health check-ups population.
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.