Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28637439›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2017

A qualitative analysis of smokers' perceptions about lung cancer screening.

Lindsay Gressard, Amy S DeGroff, Thomas B Richards, Stephanie Melillo, Julia Kish-Doto, Christina L Heminger, Elizabeth A Rohan, Kristine Gabuten Allen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Optimizing the implementation of lung cancer screening in Scotland: Focus group participant perspectives in the LUNGSCOT study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Healthcare Access, Utilization, and Preventive Health Behaviors by Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Challenges to Educating Smokers About Lung Cancer Screening: a Qualitative Study of Decision Making Experiences in Primary Care.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2019
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lindsay GressardDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA. LGressard@cdc.gov.ORCID 0000-0002-0883-2990
Amy S DeGroffDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Thomas B RichardsDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Stephanie MelilloDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Julia Kish-DotoRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Christina L HemingerThe George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Elizabeth A RohanDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Kristine Gabuten AllenDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA, 30341-3717, USA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USGeorge Washington University · USRTI International · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) began recommending lung cancer screening for high risk smokers aged 55-80 years using low-dose computed tomography (CT) scan. In light of these updated recommendations, there is a need to understand smokers' knowledge of and experiences with lung cancer screening in order to inform the design of patient education and tobacco cessation programs. The purpose of this study is to describe results of a qualitative study examining smokers' perceptions around lung cancer screening tests.

methodsIn 2009, prior to the release of the updated USPSTF recommendations, we conducted 12 120-min, gender-specific focus groups with 105 current smokers in Charlotte, North Carolina and Cincinnati, Ohio. Focus group facilitators asked participants about their experience with three lung cancer screening tests, including CT scan, chest x-ray, and sputum cytology. Focus group transcripts were transcribed and qualitatively analyzed using constant comparative methods.

resultsParticipants were 41-67 years-old, with a mean smoking history of 38.9 pack-years. Overall, 34.3% would meet the USPSTF's current eligibility criteria for screening. Most participants were unaware of all three lung cancer screening tests. The few participants who had been screened recalled limited information about the test. Nevertheless, many participants expressed a strong desire to pursue lung cancer screening. Using the social ecological model for health promotion, we identified potential barriers to lung cancer screening at the 1) health care system level (cost of procedure, confusion around results), 2) cultural level (fatalistic beliefs, distrust of medical system), and 3) individual level (lack of knowledge, denial of risk, concerns about the procedure). Although this study was conducted prior to the updated USPSTF recommendations, these findings provide a baseline for future studies examining smokers' perceptions of lung cancer screening.

conclusionWe recommend clear and patient-friendly educational tools to improve patient understanding of screening risks and benefits and the use of best practices to help smokers quit. Further qualitative studies are needed to assess changes in smokers' perceptions as lung cancer screening with CT scan becomes more widely used in community practice.

Indexed as

AdultAdvisory CommitteesAgedAttitude to HealthEarly Detection of CancerFemaleFocus GroupsHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNorth CarolinaOhioQualitative ResearchRadiography, ThoracicBarriersLung cancer screeningPatient-provider communicationSmokers

Identifiers

PMID28637439
PMCPMC5479014
OpenAlexW2701168709

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.