ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Interstitial Lung Disease Epidemiology in the Past Three Decades: A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progressive fibrotic interstitial lung diseases in India: national challenges and implications for global health policies.Health research policy and systems · 2025Review
- COVID-19 and Interstitial Lung Disease.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- More Than a Code: Getting the Epidemiology of Fibrotic Interstitial Lung Disease Right.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
- Low-Level Laser Therapy in the Management of Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Editorial: Reviews in: pulmonary medicine 2023.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Global, regional and national burden of interstitial lung disease and pulmonary sarcoidosis, 1990-2021 and projection to 2040.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current epidemiological data on interstitial lung disease (ILD) are still poor. The principal cause of the discordant data is associated with a heterogeneous group of respiratory diseases that includes a large number, about 200 families, with low frequency, distinct and sometimes unknown etiology, and different progression. In fact, some conditions spontaneously resolve, whereas others, such as IPF and most non-IPF ILDs, progress to respiratory failure and death despite treatment. Furthermore, epidemiological data are limited. The scope of the narrative review is to report ILD incidence and prevalence in registries from different countries in the last three decades. We identified 20 ILD registries (17 prospective and 3 retrospective) from major countries in Europe (n = 10), Asia (n = 7), North America (n = 2), and Oceania (n = 1). Significant discrepancies in ILD and ILD subtype prevalence and incidence among countries are reported in registries. These discrepancies could be determined by different ethnicities and socioeconomic conditions as well as by updates in disease diagnosis and classification. ILD epidemiological registries are progressively ameliorating through better adherence to updated guidelines and classification codes. An accurate and definite diagnosis and compilation of ILD epidemiological registries will be useful for a more precise monitoring of disease progression and treatment. Future research to identify the populations with the highest risk factors, including genetic and molecular studies, and implementation of disease progression scores are needed to improve ILD clinical assessment.
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.