ArticleBMJ open2012
Psychosocial consequences of allocation to lung cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Screening for lung cancer: A systematic review of overdiagnosis and its implications.Molecular oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of vascular screening interventions on perceived threat, efficacy beliefs and behavioural intentions: a systematic narrative review.Health promotion international · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Psychological Burden Associated With Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.Clinical lung cancer · 2016Pooled it
- Patient-centered outcomes among lung cancer screening recipients with computed tomography: a systematic review.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2014Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Psychological impact of lung cancer screening using a novel antibody blood test followed by imaging: the ECLS randomized controlled trial.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Immediate chest X-ray for patients at risk of lung cancer presenting in primary care: randomised controlled feasibility trial.British journal of cancer · 2017Trial
- Trial
- The significance of regular chest computed tomography in postoperative surveillance for surgically resected non-small cell lung cancer based on TNM 8th staging system.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2024Article
- Prevalence and characteristics of anxiety in patients with unconfirmed pulmonary nodules.The clinical respiratory journal · 2023Article
- Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Lung Cancer: A Review for Clinicians.Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (Miami, Fla.) · 2022Article
- Medical and Surgical Care of Patients With Mesothelioma and Their Relatives Carrying Germline BAP1 Mutations.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2022Review
- Should psychological distress be listed as a surgical indication for indeterminate pulmonary nodules: protocol for a prospective cohort study in real-world settings.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT in Smokers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- What is the balance of benefits and harms for lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2021Article
- ESR/ERS statement paper on lung cancer screening.European radiology · 2020Review
- Mapping the spectrum of psychological and behavioural responses to low-dose CT lung cancer screening offered within a Lung Health Check.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the psychosocial consequences of being allocated to the control group as compared with the screen group in a randomised lung cancer screening trial.
methodThe Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial, a randomised controlled trial, ran from 2004 to 2010 with the purpose of investigating the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening. The participants in Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial were randomised to either the control group or the screen group and were asked to complete the questionnaires Consequences Of Screening and Consequences Of Screening in Lung Cancer (COS-LC). The Consequences Of Screening and the COS-LC were used to examine the psychosocial consequences of participating in the study, by comparing the control and the screen groups' responses at the prevalence and at the incidence round.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference in socio-demographic characteristics or smoking habits between the two groups. Responses to the COS-LC collected before the incidence round were statistically significantly different on the scales 'anxiety', 'behaviour', 'dejection', 'self-blame', 'focus on airway symptoms' and 'introvert', with the control group reporting higher negative psychosocial consequences. Furthermore, the participants in both the control and the screen groups exhibited a mean increase in negative psychosocial consequences when their responses from the prevalence round were compared with their responses from the first incidence round.
conclusionsParticipation in a randomised controlled trial on lung cancer screening has negative psychosocial consequences for the apparently healthy participants-both the participants in the screen group and the control group. This negative impact was greatest for the control group.
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.