Screening for lung cancer
Current Opinion in Oncology, ISSN: 1040-8746, Vol: 16, Issue: 2, Page: 141-145
2004
- 5Citations
- 53Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
Purpose of review: With the development of newer forms of technology such as low-dose spiral computed tomography, there has been a resurgent interest in screening for lung cancer. The purpose of this review is to highlight recent advances in screening for lung cancer. Articles published since September 2002 are reviewed here. Recent findings: More frequent screenings (every 4 or 6 months) showed increased mortality from lung cancer, compared with annual screening. A mass screening conducted in 1990 was effective in a case-control study. The results of lung cancer screening by low-dose spiral computed tomography were reported from the Milan group and the Mayo Clinic. Computed tomography depicted peripheral early lung cancer, especially adenocarcinoma. These results are consistent with previous reports from other groups. Screening with imaging becomes more sensitive with automated computerized methods. Summary: A high percentage of stage IA lung cancers were detected by screening with low-dose helical computed tomography. The characteristics of the nodules detected by low-dose spiral computed tomography have been clarified. There have been many controversial discussions about cost effectiveness and overdiagnosis. There is still no evidence that screening tests reduce the rate of cancer-specific mortality. Several studies of screening for lung cancer are under way.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=1642528916&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00001622-200403000-00010; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15075906; http://journals.lww.com/00001622-200403000-00010; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00001622-200403000-00010; https://insights.ovid.com/article/00001622-200403000-00010
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know