ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2019
Evaluating Lung Cancer Screening Uptake, Outcomes, and Costs in the United States: Challenges With Existing Data and Recommendations for Improvement.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Limitations in US Cancer Screening Rate Data and Opportunities to Improve Precision Prevention.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Updates in Lung Cancer Screening: A Decade of Evidence.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Precision Medicine in Lung Cancer Screening: A Paradigm Shift in Early Detection-Precision Screening for Lung Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Primary care patient interests in joining a planned multi-cancer early detection clinical trial.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Interventions Designed to Increase the Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening: An Equity-Oriented Scoping Review.JTO clinical and research reports · 2023Article
- Shared Decision-Making During a Lung Cancer Screening Visit: Is It a Barrier or Does It Bring Value?Chest · 2023Article
- Integrating primary care, shared decision making, and community engagement to facilitate equitable access to multi-cancer early detection clinical trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Determinants Associated With Longitudinal Adherence to Annual Lung Cancer Screening: A Retrospective Analysis of Claims Data.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2021Article
- Lung cancer screening: targeting the hard to reach-a review.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Review
- The Intersection of Rural Residence and Minority Race/Ethnicity in Cancer Disparities in the United States.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Attitudes toward tobacco cessation and lung cancer screening in two South African communities.Global public health · 2020Article
- Radiomics: an overview in lung cancer management-a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Review
- Rates of positive lung cancer screening examinations in academic versus community practice.Translational lung cancer research · 2020Article
- Evaluating Lung Cancer Screening Across Diverse Healthcare Systems: A Process Model from the Lung PROSPR Consortium.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2020Article
- Challenges of using nationally representative, population-based surveys to assess rural cancer disparities.Preventive medicine · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported substantial reduction in lung cancer mortality among high-risk individuals screened annually with low-dose helical computed tomography (LDCT). As a result, the US Preventive Services Task Force issued a B recommendation for annual LDCT in high-risk individuals, which requires private insurers to cover it without cost-sharing. The Medicare program also covers LDCT for high-risk beneficiaries without cost-sharing. However, the NLST findings may not be generalizable to the community setting because of differences in patients, providers, and practices participating in the NLST. Thus, examining uptake of LDCT screening in community practice is critical, as is evaluating the immediate and downstream outcomes of screening, including false-positive scans, follow-up examinations and adverse events, costs, stage of disease at diagnosis, and survival. This commentary presents an overview of the landscape of the data resources currently available to evaluate the uptake, outcomes, and costs of LDCT screening in the United States. We describe the strengths and limitations of existing data sources, including administrative databases, surveys, and registries. Thereafter, we provide recommendations for improving the data infrastructure pertaining to three overarching research areas: receipt of guideline-consistent screening and follow-up, weighing benefits and harms of screening, and costs of screening.
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.