ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
The development and application of a novel precise health management model for pulmonary nodules population: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The early screening of lung cancer faces issues such as overtreatment, complex patient visits processes, poor adherence, and significant psychological harm. The purpose of this study was to develop a novel precise health management model for lung nodule patients aimed at optimizing patient management processes. Methods: Two thousand eight hundred sixteen consecutive patients undergoing early lung cancer screening at our department were included in the study. A new management model has been developed that incorporates a structured follow-up script system and a level-to-level multidisciplinary treatment approach. The patients were divided into the following two groups: intervention group (Group A) was managed using the new model, and control group (Group B) was managed using a traditional model. Timely follow-up visits, the average cumulative effective dose (ED), the proportion percentage of patients who have surgery at the hospital, the proportion percentage of benign nodules in the surgical patients, the proportion percentage of patients diagnosed with malignant tumors in Tumor Node Metastasis (TNM) stage I after surgery, and the follow-up interval for the low-risk pulmonary nodule (PN) patients were evaluated between the two groups. Results: In total, 1,178 patients in the intervention group and 1,638 patients in the control group were included in the study. The loss to follow up rate was significantly lower in the intervention group than the control group (28.5% versus 32.5%, P=0.03). The intervention group had a significantly higher rate of timely return visits than the control group (60.3% versus 53.0%, P=0.001). The average cumulative ED of radiation was significantly lower in the intervention group than the control group (4.611±3.909 versus 5.631±5.345 mSv, P=0.001). The incidence of postoperative benign lesions decreased from 13.0% to 3.0% under the novel model in the intervention group. Conclusions: Our model provided a more rational and effective management strategy for PNs. This approach simplified the process steps for a patient visit, improved patients' adherence, reduced radiation exposure, avoided overdiagnosis and overtreatment, and reduced psychological harm.
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.