Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20972608›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2011

Volunteer effect and compromised randomization in the Mayo Project of screening for lung cancer.

Lorenzo Dominioni, Albino Poli, William Mantovani, Nicola Rotolo, Andrea Imperatori

Open access · hybridAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Screening for lung cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. The Rotterdam Study: 2014 objectives and design update.European journal of epidemiology · 2013
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lorenzo Dominioni
Albino Poli
William Mantovani
Nicola Rotolo
Andrea Imperatori
University of Insubria · ITUniversity of Verona · ITOspedale di Circolo e Fondazione Macchi · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It has been confirmed recently that the volunteer effect in lung cancer screening is characterized by higher lung cancer mortality risk in self-selected screening participants. The Mayo Lung Project, the most influential trial of screening for lung cancer ever completed, was conducted in nonvolunteer Mayo Clinic outpatients, with a peculiar study design that rendered the randomization vulnerable to the volunteer effect. Of all nonvolunteers randomized in the Mayo Lung Project, only those allocated in the screened group were asked consent to participate in the trial. The final Mayo Lung Project report stated that 655 randomized nonvolunteers refused screening and were excluded from the study, thus documenting violation of the rule that no selection should occur after randomization. The long-term follow-up of the Mayo Lung Project showed an enigmatic result which has never been explained: the lung cancer mortality was 13% higher in the screening intervention group than in the control group [4.4 (95% CI 3.9-4.9) vs. 3.9 (95% CI 3.5-4.4) per 1,000 person-years; P = 0.09]. Such overrepresented mortality is consistent with the volunteer effect and supports the concept that the Mayo Lung Project randomization was compromised by the post-randomization self-selection of participant nonvolunteers.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionVoluntary ProgramsBiasEarly Detection of CancerHumansLung NeoplasmsRadiography, ThoracicRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID20972608
PMCPMC3018594
OpenAlexW2007959721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.