Draft for public review — proposed mapping, not verified. The per-country capture and the data-quality rating on each indicator are NTOG's proposed reading of published registry documentation. They are what this public review is meant to confirm or correct — not asserted fact. The Danish Lung Nodule Registry is used as the Nordic reference model; for the other countries, national nodule-pathway capture is largely developmental.
Layer 1 · Diagnostic completeness (foundational data quality)
QI 1Structured pulmonary nodule registry / pathway data completeness
Data quality: RedNumerator: Nodules entering a structured pathway with the minimum recommended fields completed (detection route, index CT, type, size/volume, location, risk category, recommended next step, planned follow-up, outcome).
Denominator: Nodules that should enter a structured nodule pathway — indeterminate incidental nodules and, where implemented, screen-detected nodules.
QI 2Structured radiology-report completeness for pulmonary nodules
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Nodule CT reports with all mandatory structured fields complete (type, size/volume, location, number, baseline/new, growth or VDT, risk category, next step, follow-up interval).
Denominator: CT reports identifying indeterminate nodules that enter a pathway or require surveillance / work-up.
Layer 6 · Pathway timeliness
QI 3Timely follow-up CT for indeterminate pulmonary nodules
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Patients with indeterminate nodules who receive the follow-up CT within the guideline-defined surveillance window for their nodule type, size/volume, growth pattern and risk category.
Denominator: Patients with indeterminate nodules for whom CT surveillance is recommended.
QI 4Time from pulmonary nodule detection to definitive outcome
Data quality: AmberMeasure: Median days (with IQR) from first recorded nodule detection to definitive outcome — benign/stable discharge, escalation to work-up, or lung cancer diagnosis.
Denominator: Indeterminate nodules entering a structured follow-up or diagnostic pathway.
Layer 4 · Care process
QI 5Guideline-concordant pulmonary nodule management
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Nodules managed according to the agreed recommendation for their type, size/volume, growth and risk category — or with a documented justified deviation.
Denominator: Indeterminate nodules with enough data to assign a guideline category.
QI 6Potential over-investigation of low-risk pulmonary nodules
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Low-risk nodules receiving investigations beyond the guideline pathway without documented justification (PET-CT, invasive biopsy, surgery, or unusually intensive CT surveillance).
Denominator: Low-risk nodules for which surveillance or no further follow-up is recommended.
Layer 5 · Outcomes
QI 7Cancer yield of invasive pulmonary nodule diagnostics
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Invasive nodule procedures that yield a malignant diagnosis (primary lung cancer; other malignancy reported separately if agreed).
Denominator: All invasive diagnostic procedures performed for indeterminate nodules (CT-guided biopsy, bronchoscopy/navigational, EBUS for nodule work-up, surgical diagnostic biopsy).
QI 8Benign resection rate after pulmonary nodule work-up
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Surgical resections for indeterminate nodules where final pathology shows benign disease / no malignancy.
Denominator: All surgical resections performed for indeterminate nodules (with secondary reporting per all nodules entering the pathway).
QI 9Complication rate of invasive pulmonary nodule diagnostics
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Invasive nodule procedures followed by a clinically significant complication within the agreed window (pneumothorax needing chest drain, major bleeding/haemoptysis, air embolism, unplanned admission, procedure-related death).
Denominator: All invasive diagnostic procedures performed for indeterminate nodules.
QI 10Stage I–II proportion among nodule-detected lung cancers
Data quality: AmberNumerator: Nodule-detected lung cancers diagnosed at stage I or II (agreed TNM edition).
Denominator: All incident lung cancers identified through a nodule pathway or nodule-surveillance programme.
Review these indicators with us
Are the definitions right? Is the proposed per-country capture and data-quality rating accurate for your registry? Tell us — especially country leads. We rate and discuss openly on LinkedIn.
Review & discuss on LinkedInReference model: Danish Lung Nodule Registry (part of the Danish Lung Cancer Registry). Frameworks referenced across indicators: Fleischner 2017, BTS 2015, Lung-RADS, NELSON-derived nodule categories, and the Nordic incidental pulmonary nodule guideline-adherence survey. Candidate indicators — not finalised NTOG standards.