ArticleSarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG2025
Chest radiography in interstitial lung disease: Accuracy and radiological features from a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Quantification of Longitudinal HRCT Changes During Treatment of Pulmonary Tuberculosis: An Exploratory Proof-of-Concept Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
backgroundThis systematic review aims to summarize and evaluate the diagnostic performance of chest X-ray (CXR) compared with high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) for detecting interstitial lung disease (ILD). RESEARCH QUESTION: what is the diagnostic accuracy and radiological finding of CXR in ILD, using HRCT as a gold standard. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodWe systematically searched electronic databases to find studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of CXR and HRCT for detecting ILD. We used StataMP/17 and R statistical software for the quantitative analysis. Values like pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio with their 95% confidence interval, and the SROC curve was performed.
resultsWe included a total of 18 studies involving 1917 patients. Compared to HRCT, CXR had sensitivity of 0.62 (95% CI: 0.47-0.74), specificity of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85 - 0.93), positive likelihood ratio of 5.9 (95% CI 4.5-7.7), negative likelihood ratio of 0.43 (95% CI 0.31, 0.59), diagnostic odds ratio of 14 (95% CI 9 - 21), and area under the ROC curve of 0.88 (95% CI 0.85-0.91). Deek's plot showed no publication bias (p= 0.44). CXR had lower sensitivity compared with HRCT in detecting specific radiologic findings. Subgroup analysis revealed that a patient sample surpassing 100 indicated significantly higher specificity.
conclusionChest radiography exhibits moderate sensitivity and high specificity for detecting ILD when HRCT is regarded as the gold standard test. Although CXR is recommended as an initial diagnostic tool, it should not be solely relied upon for a definitive diagnosis, as it might miss some cases.
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.