ArticleERJ open research2025
The interstitial lung disease patient pathway: from referral to diagnosis.
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Geographical, institutional and workplace variability in genetic evaluation, screening practices, multidisciplinary care, and lung transplantation management for familial interstitial lung disease.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Association of prior interstitial lung disease awareness with knowledge, attitudes, and practices in Saudi Arabia: a national cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Interstitial lung diseases: from invisibility to integration - a call to build collaborative networks.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- The benefits of a rapid diagnostic primary care circuit for interstitial lung disease.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Suspected interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients may be referred to an ILD-specialist centre or a non-ILD-specialist centre for diagnosis and treatment. Early referral and management of patients at ILD-specialist centres has been shown to improve survival and reduce hospitalisations. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the ILD patient diagnostic pathway and prompted centres to adapt. This study investigates and contrasts ILD patient pathways in ILD-specialist and non-ILD-specialist centres, focusing on referrals, caseloads, diagnostic tools, multi-disciplinary team (MDT) meeting practices and resource accessibility. Methods: Conducted as a cross-sectional study, a global self-selecting survey ran from September 2022 to January 2023. Participants included ILD specialists and healthcare professionals (HCPs) from ILD-specialist centres and non-ILD-specialist centres. Results: Of 363 unique respondents from 64 countries, 259 were from ILD-specialist centres and 104 from non-ILD-specialist centres. ILD centres had better resource availability, exhibiting higher utilisation of diagnostic tests (median: 12 tests) than non-ILD centres (nine tests) and better access to specialist professions attending MDT meetings (median: six professions at meeting) in specialist centres than non-ILD centres (three professions at meeting). Transitioning to virtual MDT meetings allowed HCPs from other locations to join meetings in nearly 90% of all centres, increasing regular participation in 60% of specialist centres and 72% of non-ILD centres. For treatment of patients, specialist centres had better access to antifibrotic drugs (91%) compared to non-ILD centres (60%). Conclusions: Diagnostic pathways for ILD patients diverged between specialist centres and non-ILD centres. Disparities in resource and specialist availability existed between centres.
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.