ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2026
Geographical, institutional and workplace variability in genetic evaluation, screening practices, multidisciplinary care, and lung transplantation management for familial interstitial lung disease.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 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
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvances in genetics have improved the understanding of risk factors for interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). However, geographical and institutional differences in genetic evaluation may affect clinical practice. We aimed to investigate how such variability influences access to genetic testing and screening, awareness of telomerase mutation-related symptoms, and the management of lung transplantation in familial ILD.
methodsAn expert panel of pulmonologists working in the field of ILD developed an international survey targeting pulmonologists involved in ILD care. The survey comprised 74 questions addressing diagnosis, screening, genetic testing methods, lung transplantation, and future research needs in familial ILD.
resultsIn total, 237 pulmonologists representing 50 countries participated in the survey. Respondents from Europe, Oceania, and North America reported significant better access to genetic testing compared to the other continents. European respondents more often had a standardized screening program for first degree relatives than respondents from other continents. Having access to genetic testing significantly increased the likelihood of asking for a family history of early gray hair, liver cirrhosis, and bone marrow disease if a family history of ILD was present and in patients with idiopathic ILD younger than 50 years. Respondents from academic centers were significantly more likely than those from ILD centers to consider telomere length below the 10th percentile as a contraindication for lung transplantation. Respondents from non-academic centers were significantly less likely to treat patients with antifibrotic therapy compared to respondents from academic and ILD centers.
conclusionThis study demonstrated significant differences in access to genetic testing, screening and genetic multidisciplinary teams as well as differences in the management of lung transplantation and antifibrotic therapy in familial ILD. These findings highlight the need for international collaboration to develop evidence-based guidelines for the management of familial ILD.
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.