ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
The role of radiological imaging in differentiating malignant and benign pulmonary nodules: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate differentiation between malignant and benign pulmonary nodules remains a critical challenge in clinical practice. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of computed tomography (CT) imaging features in distinguishing malignant from benign pulmonary nodules.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 200 patients with pulmonary nodules who underwent chest CT scanning and subsequent histopathological confirmation between January 2020 and December 2024. CT imaging features including nodule size, density, margin characteristics, internal characteristics, and relationship to adjacent structures were analyzed. To systematically evaluate the independent contribution of CT imaging features, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed using a progressive modeling approach. Model stability was assessed using bootstrap internal validation (1,000 resamples) and verified by AIC-based backward stepwise selection. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was employed to assess the diagnostic performance of CT imaging features.
resultsAmong 200 cases, 88 (44.00%) were malignant and 112 (56.00%) were benign. Malignant nodules demonstrated significantly larger mean diameter (18.76 ± 8.52 mm vs. 12.85 ± 5.94 mm, P < 0.001), higher prevalence of spiculated margins (70.45% vs. 28.57%, P < 0.001), lobulation (67.05% vs. 33.04%, P < 0.001), and pleural indentation (54.55% vs. 22.32%, P < 0.001). Calcification was more common in benign nodules (43.75% vs. 12.50%, P < 0.001). After adjustment for clinical confounders, nodule size (OR = 1.095, P < 0.001), spiculated margin (OR = 4.523, P < 0.001), lobulation (OR = 2.845, P < 0.001), and calcification (OR = 0.185, P < 0.001) remained independent predictors of malignancy. AIC-based backward stepwise selection independently confirmed the same four CT features, supporting the robustness of variable selection. The integrated model incorporating four CT imaging features achieved sensitivity of 71.59%, specificity of 88.39%, and area under the curve of 0.870(optimism-corrected AUC = 0.845).
conclusionChest CT imaging features, particularly nodule size, spiculated margin, lobulation, and calcification patterns, are independent predictors of malignancy and demonstrate good diagnostic performance in differentiating malignant from benign pulmonary nodules. These findings provide preliminary evidence supporting the integration of structured CT feature analysis into clinical decision-making; however, external validation in independent cohorts is needed before clinical implementation.
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.