Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31179379›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer treatment and research2019

Examining Lung Cancer Screening Behaviors in the Primary Care Setting: A Mixed Methods Approach.

Alvie Ahsan, Eva Zimmerman, Elisa Marie Rodriguez, Christy Widman, Deborah Oates Erwin, Frances Georgette Saad-Harfouche, Martin Christopher Mahoney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer treatment and research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

Alvie AhsanJacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University at New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA.
Eva ZimmermanJacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University at New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA.
Elisa Marie RodriguezDepartment of Cancer Prevention & Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, USA.
Christy WidmanDepartment of Cancer Prevention & Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, USA.
Deborah Oates ErwinDepartment of Cancer Prevention & Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, USA.
Frances Georgette Saad-HarfoucheDepartment of Cancer Prevention & Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, USA.
Martin Christopher MahoneyDepartment of Cancer Prevention & Control, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, USA.

Funding

Two-Spirit Films in Indigenous Cancer HealthP30CA016056 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI MARK G FRATTINI · 1985 to 2026
$116.6M
Western New York Cancer Coalition (WNYC2) Center to Reduce DisparitiesU54CA153598 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI ERWIN, DEBORAH O, UNDERWOOD, WILLIE · 2010 to 2015
$4.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016056NCI NIH HHS U54 CA153598
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While the National Lung Screening Trials (NLST) demonstrated the efficacy of low dose chest computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer early detection, utilization of LDCT remains suboptimal. The purpose of this formative study was to understand attitudes and beliefs among primary care clinicians regarding LDCT lung cancer screening as well as to assess gaps in knowledge to identify opportunities for reinforcing personalized lung cancer screening that is accessible and evidence-based. A 20-item closed and open-ended interview was conducted with a targeted group of primary care clinicians (38 respondents; 33 physicians and 5 NPs/PAs). Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics while qualitative data was analyzed thematically. Although 50.0% of clinicians characterized LDCT as "very effective", only 47.4% of clinicians reported that they frequently or often recommend LDCT as a lung cancer screening tool. Respondents were generally unconcerned with the high rate of false positive test results. The majority of clinicians were referring patients for LDCT based on smoking history, however other factors were also considered (e.g., health status, sex, family history, past medical history, and occupational exposures.) The majority of respondents were knowledgeable about the use of LDCT as a lung screening tool but were unsure about its effectiveness for lung cancer early detection. Some clinicians are recommending patients for LDCT based on factors which are inconsistent with evidence-based guidelines.

Indexed as

Clinician EducationEarly DetectionLung Cancer ScreeningPrimary CareProvider Perception

Identifiers

PMID31179379
PMCPMC6554719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.