ArticleBMJ open2025
Can a virtual multi-centre multi-disciplinary discussion improve the diagnosis and management of interstitial lung disease? A retrospective cohort study across multiple institutions.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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.
- Article
- Interstitial lung diseases: from invisibility to integration - a call to build collaborative networks.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMulti-disciplinary discussions (MDDs) improve diagnosis and management of interstitial lung disease (ILD). The value of a virtual multi-centre MDD (V-MCMDD) incorporating expertise from multiple institutions remains underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a V-MCMDD on diagnosis and management in ILD.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective multi-centre cohort study involving tertiary and secondary hospital clinics, private practices and community outpatient centres, all participating via a virtual platform. Between August 2020 and June 2023, patient cases were reviewed through V-MCMDDs, which included clinical, radiological, pathological and laboratory data. Each case was discussed to reach a consensus diagnosis and management plan.
resultsFollowing the V-MCMDD review, the diagnosis was revised in 51% of patients (p=0.031), and management plans were modified in 41% of cases. A significant shift in treatment was observed in patients with changed diagnoses vs unchanged diagnoses (p value=0.002).
conclusionsOur findings suggest that the implementation of V-MCMDDs can be valuable in the diagnostic and therapeutic process for ILD. Incorporating input from multiple centres via a virtual format can lead to significant changes in both diagnosis and management, potentially improving patient outcomes.
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.