BVA decisions by condition
Restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis issue in 851 decisions. It granted the restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis issue in 16.7% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 29.4%, and remanded it in 53.1%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 36.2% were granted.
Decisions
851
2017–2026
Granted
16.7%
All conditions: 19.4%
Granted on the merits
36.2%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
53.1%
Denied: 29.4%
Restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis outcomes by year
| Year | Issues decided | Granted | Denied | Remanded | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 50 | 8.0% | 32.0% | 60.0% | 0.0% |
| 2019 | 81 | 11.1% | 30.9% | 56.8% | 1.2% |
| 2020 | 99 | 14.1% | 29.3% | 56.6% | 0.0% |
| 2021 | 81 | 13.6% | 27.2% | 59.3% | 0.0% |
| 2022 | 99 | 17.2% | 18.2% | 63.6% | 1.0% |
| 2023 | 93 | 15.1% | 31.2% | 50.5% | 3.2% |
| 2024 | 103 | 21.4% | 30.1% | 47.6% | 1.0% |
| 2025 | 181 | 18.8% | 31.5% | 49.2% | 0.6% |
| 2026 | 55 | 29.1% | 34.5% | 36.4% | 0.0% |
Each row counts issues (each condition the Board decided), so the shares add up to 100%. Other: dismissed, withdrawn or no clear outcome. Years with fewer than 50 issues are left out.
Evidence in granted and denied restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 175 | 67.2% | 21.7% | +45.5 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 87 | 70.8% | 29.4% | +41.4 pts |
| Treating physician opinion | 61 | 63.2% | 33.3% | +29.8 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 342 | 48.9% | 24.8% | +24.2 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 159 | 54.0% | 32.8% | +21.1 pts |
| Combat service | 65 | 50.0% | 34.8% | +15.2 pts |
| Lay statement | 636 | 32.7% | 49.4% | −16.7 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 70.4% of the decisions that granted restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 29.6% of grants and 11.2% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 455 | 36.0% | 36.5% | −0.5 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 599 | 33.9% | 44.3% | −10.4 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established27
- Caused by the service-connected disability8
- Criteria for service connection met4
- Service connection established2
Most common reasons in denials
- No current diagnosis39
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service27
- Service records negative or silent26
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim26
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis22
- Current diagnosis established14
- Criteria for service connection not met8
- Evidence weighs against service connection3
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis decisions
Granted
Competent and credible evidence establishes relation to Hodgkin's disease treated during service.; Veteran's testimony and medical records indicate shortness of breath consistent with radiation therapy.; Presumption of soundness rebutted as Hodgkin's disease diagnosed during service.
Current diagnosis of interstitial pulmonary fibrosis; In-service exposure to ordnances (explosives, mortars, cement, mercury); Treating VA pulmonologist opinion found potential contribution from ordnances; VA examiner opined less likely than not, but Board gave greater weight to treating physician
VA examiner noted lung disability resulted from prolonged intubation/tracheostomy, not amputation directly; Examiner's opinion found inadequate as it denied service connection despite acknowledging intermediate factor; Evidence in approximate balance, benefit of doubt applied
Denied
Private opinion from chiropractor lacked specialized training; VA examiner found no respiratory insufficiency pathology; VA findings based on objective pulmonary function testing
VA pulmonologist opined less likely than not due to service.; VA pulmonologist opined less likely than not due to diabetes.; Agent Orange not a listed risk factor; idiopathic etiology noted.
No treatment in service records; No post-service treatment; VA exam found no diagnosis or findings supporting diagnosis; Veteran's self-diagnosis deemed incompetent; More weight given to medical evidence showing no current diagnosis
Rules that apply to restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis claims
- 38 CFR 3.303
Principles of service connection
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a restrictive lung disease interstitial pulmonary fibrosis issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
- “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.