ArticlePloS one2018
A national survey of lung cancer specialists' views on low-dose CT screening for lung cancer in Korea.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-World Survival Outcomes in EGFR-Mutant Advanced NSCLC Treated With EGFR TKIs: Insights From a Single-Center Clinical Data Warehouse Analysis in South Korea.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of doctor-shopping behavior on patient survival in lung cancer: findings from a 11-year cohort study using Korean claims data.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Level of knowledge on low-dose CT lung cancer screening in Sichuan province, China: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Conditional Survival of Surgically Treated Patients with Lung Cancer: A Comprehensive Analyses of Overall, Recurrence-free, and Relative Survival.Cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Successes and challenges of implementing a lung cancer screening program in federally qualified health centers: a qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Public opinion on implementing the National Lung Cancer Screening Program in Korea.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Article
- [Progress of Lung Cancer Screening with Low Dose Helical Computed Tomography].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2020Review
- Impact of smoking amount on clinicopathological features and survival in non-small cell lung cancer.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- A simulation study of the effect of lung cancer screening in China, Japan, Singapore, and South Korea.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer specialists play an important role in designing and implementing lung cancer screening. We aimed to describe their 1) attitudes toward low-dose lung computed tomography (LDCT) screening, 2) current practices and experiences of LDCT screening and 3) attitudes and opinions towards national lung cancer screening program (NLCSP). We conducted a national web-based survey of pulmonologists, thoracic surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiological oncologists who are members of Korean Association for Lung Cancer (N = 183). Almost all respondents agreed that LDCT screening increases early detection (100%), improves survival (95.1%), and gives a good smoking cessation counseling opportunity (88.6%). Most were concerned about its high false positive results (79.8%) and the subsequent negative effects. Less than half were concerned about radiation hazard (37.2%). Overall, most (89.1%) believed that the benefits outweigh the risks and harms. Most (79.2%) stated that they proactively recommend LDCT screening to those who are eligible for the current guidelines, but the screening propensity varied considerably. The majority (77.6%) agreed with the idea of NLCSP and its beneficial effect, but had concerns about the quality control of CT devices (74.9%), quality assurance of radiologic interpretation (63.3%), poor access to LDCT (56.3%), and difficulties in selecting eligible population using self-report history (66.7%). Most (79.2%) thought that program need to be funded by a specialized fund rather than by the National Health Insurance. The opinions on the level of copayment for screening varied. Our findings would be an important source for health policy decision when considering for NLCSP in Korea.
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.