ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2015
Evaluation of a Personalized, Web-Based Decision Aid for Lung Cancer Screening.
Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 9 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
53 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge translation strategies to enhance lung cancer screening programme implementation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Pooled it
- Acceptability and perceptions of personalised risk-based cancer screening among health-care professionals and the general public: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Lancet. Public health · 2025Pooled it
- Digital Interventions to Support Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Promoting lung cancer awareness, help-seeking and early detection: a systematic review of interventions.Health promotion international · 2021Pooled it
- Guideline
- Guideline
- A Comparison of Web-Based Cancer Risk Calculators That Inform Shared Decision-making for Lung Cancer Screening.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- An official American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians policy statement: implementation of low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening programs in clinical practice.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2015Guideline
- Supporting community translation of lung cancer screening: A web-based decision aid to support informed decision making.Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Trial
- Providing Reminders and Education Prior to lung cancer screening: Feasibility and acceptability of a multilevel approach to address disparities in lung cancer screening.Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Trial
- Effect of a Patient Decision Aid on Lung Cancer Screening Decision-Making by Persons Who Smoke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2020Trial
- Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Information Film on Informed Decision-making: A Randomized Trial.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2019Trial
- MyLungHealth, a Patient-Facing Education Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Qualitative User-Centered Design Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.CHEST pulmonary · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Technology-Based Interventions in Promoting Lung Cancer Screening Uptake and Decision-Making Among Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- The Use of a Tailored Decision Aid to Improve Understanding of Lung Cancer Screening in People With HIV.Chest · 2025Observational
- Review
- Patient Perspectives on a Patient-Facing Tool for Lung Cancer Screening.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Multilevel approaches to address disparities in lung cancer screening: a study protocol.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionInformed decision making has been highlighted as an important aspect of lung cancer screening programs. This study seeks to assess the efficacy of a web-based patient decision aid for lung cancer screening, www.shouldiscreen.com.
methodsA before-and-after study (August through December 2014) was conducted where participants navigated a web-based decision aid that provided information about low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening. Using an established prediction model, the decision aid computed baseline lung cancer risk and an individual's chances of benefiting from, and risk of being harmed by, screening. Outcome measures included knowledge of lung cancer risk factors and lung cancer screening, decisional conflict, concordance, and acceptability of the decision aid. Data were collected from 60 participants who were current or former smokers, had no history of lung cancer, and had not received a chest computed tomographic scan in the previous year. Analysis took place in 2015.
resultsKnowledge increased after seeing the decision aid compared with before (p<0.001), whereas the score on the Decisional Conflict Scale decreased (p<0.001). Concordance between a participant's preference to screen and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation improved after seeing the decision aid (p<0.001). Risk perceptions among the screen-ineligible group changed (n=49), contrary to those who were eligible (n=11). Ninety-seven percent of the participants reported that the decision aid was likely useful for lung cancer screening decision making.
conclusionsThe web-based decision aid should be a helpful resource for individuals considering lung cancer screening, as well as for practitioners and health systems with lung cancer screening programs.
Indexed as
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.