ArticleChest2019
The Landscape of US Lung Cancer Screening Services.
Article in Chest, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying Barriers and Strategies to Support a Community Navigator-Driven Approach for Lung Cancer Screening.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Analysis of Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Among Patients Diagnosed With Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2026Article
- Applying artificial intelligence to ensure high quality and equitable lung cancer screening.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Tobacco use and perceived risk of lung cancer in a safety-net population.Research square · 2025Article
- Disparities in lung cancer screening utilization at two health systems in the Southeastern USA.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Current Evidence for a Lung Cancer Screening Program.Portuguese journal of public health · 2024Review
- Next-generation digital chest tomosynthesis.Journal of clinical imaging science · 2024Article
- Surgical markup in lung cancer resection, 2015-2020.JTCVS open · 2023Article
- Training and Dissemination of Lung Cancer Education Curriculum Among Community Health Advisors in the Deep South: a Program Evaluation.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Article
- Research Priorities for Interventions to Address Health Disparities in Lung Nodule Management: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2023Article
- Implementing physician education to increase lung cancer screening uptake.Lung cancer management · 2023Article
- A narrative review of lung cancer screening in underserved populations.Current challenges in thoracic surgery · 2023Article
- Pre-pandemic geographic access to hospital-based telehealth for cancer care in the United States.PloS one · 2023Article
- Lost to follow up?: A qualitative study of why some patients do not pursue lung cancer screening.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Distribution and Geographic Accessibility of Lung Cancer Screening Centers in the United States.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2021Article
- State Variation in Low-Dose Computed Tomography Scanning for Lung Cancer Screening in the United States.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
- Walking the talk on multi-level interventions: The power of parsimony.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLow adoption of lung cancer screening is potentially caused by inadequate access to a comprehensive lung cancer screening registry (LCSR), currently a requirement for reimbursement by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. However, variations in LCSR facilities have not been extensively studied.
methodsWe applied a hierarchical clustering method to a comprehensive database integrating state-level LCSR facility density, defined as the number of facilities per 100,000 at-risk persons, lung cancer outcomes including mortality and stage-specific incidence, and socioeconomic and behavioral factors.
resultsWe found three distinct clusters of LCSR facilities roughly corresponding to the northern (cluster 1), southeastern (cluster 2), and southwestern (cluster 3) states. The southeastern states had the lowest total number of facilities (67 ± 44 in cluster 2, 74 ± 69 in cluster 1, 80 ± 100 in cluster 3), the slowest increase in facilities (23 ± 20 in cluster 2, 26 ± 28 in cluster 1, 27 ± 32 in cluster 3) between 2016 and 2018, and the highest lung cancer burden and current smokers. They ranked second in terms of facility density (2.9 ± 1.0 in cluster 3, 3.8 ± 1.3 in cluster 2, 6.3 ± 2.8 in cluster 1) and increase in facility density (1.1 ± 0.3 in cluster 3, 1.3 ± 0.7 in cluster 2, 2.5 ± 2.5 in cluster 1).
conclusionsWe found substantial state-level variability in LCSR facilities tied to lung cancer burden, socioeconomic characteristics, and behavioral characteristics. Given the known risk factors of lung cancer, correcting a suboptimal distribution of screening programs will likely lead to improved lung cancer outcomes.
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.