Trial reportJAMA network open2020
Effect of a Patient Decision Aid on Lung Cancer Screening Decision-Making by Persons Who Smoke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02286713 (Promoting Informed Decisions About Lung Cancer Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 58 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Promoting Informed Decisions About Lung Cancer Screening: Randomized Trial
Who cites it
58 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge translation strategies to enhance lung cancer screening programme implementation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Pooled it
- Lung cancer screening completion among patients using decision aids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Pooled it
- Patient barriers and facilitators to lung cancer screening uptake and intention to screen: a systematic review using the Theoretical Domains Framework.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of Interventions Intended to Increase Lung Cancer Screening Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Digital Interventions to Support Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Guideline
- Guideline
- Pooled it
- Supporting community translation of lung cancer screening: A web-based decision aid to support informed decision making.Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Trial
- Lung Cancer Screening Decision Aid Designed for a Primary Care Setting: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Evaluation of a Web-Based Culturally Sensitive Educational Video to Facilitate Informed Cervical Cancer Screening Decisions Among Turkish- and Moroccan-Dutch Women Aged 30 to 60 Years: Randomized Intervention Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Trial
- Effect of a Telecare Case Management Program for Older Adults Who Are Homebound During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2021Trial
- Mixed-Method Formative Evaluation and Cultural Adaptation of Digital Health Communication Content and Delivery Promoting Lung Cancer Screening Shared Decision-Making.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterTrial
- Informing the cultural adaptation of a lung cancer screening shared decision-making and navigation intervention for Hispanic adults: a qualitative study.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Article
- Patient and Healthcare Provider Barriers in the LDCT Lung Cancer Screening Continuum.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.CHEST pulmonary · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric evaluation of a decision quality instrument for lung cancer screening decisions (DQI-LCS).BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Individual Preference for Fecal Immunochemical Test Options among Younger Adults: A Discrete Choice Experiment.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography lowers lung cancer mortality but has potential harms. Current guidelines support patients receiving information about the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening during decision-making. Objective: To examine the effect of a patient decision aid (PDA) about lung cancer screening compared with a standard educational material (EDU) on decision-making outcomes among smokers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted using 13 state tobacco quitlines. Current and recent tobacco quitline clients who met age and smoking history eligibility for lung cancer screening were enrolled from March 30, 2015, to September 12, 2016, and followed up for 6 months until May 5, 2017. Data analysis was conducted between May 5, 2017, and September 30, 2018. Interventions: Participants were randomized to the PDA video Lung Cancer Screening: Is It Right for Me? (n = 259) or to EDU (n = 257). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were preparation for decision-making and decisional conflict measured at 1 week. Secondary outcomes included knowledge, intentions, and completion of screening within 6 months of receiving the intervention measured by patient report. Results: Of 516 quit line clients enrolled, 370 (71.7%) were younger than 65 years, 320 (62.0%) were female, 138 (26.7%) identified as black, 47 (9.1%) did not have health insurance, and 226 (43.8%) had a high school or lower educational level. Of participants using the PDA, 153 of 227 (67.4%) were well prepared to make a screening decision compared with 108 of 224 participants (48.2%) using EDU (odds ratio [OR], 2.31; 95% CI, 1.56-3.44; P < .001). Feeling informed about their screening choice was reported by 117 of 234 participants (50.0%) using a PDA compared with 66 of 233 participants (28.3%) using EDU (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.72-3.79; P < .001); 159 of 234 participants (68.0%) using a PDA compared with 110 of 232 (47.4%) participants using EDU reported being clear about their values related to the harms and benefits of screening (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.60-3.51; P < .001). Participants using a PDA were more knowledgeable about lung cancer screening than participants using EDU at each follow-up assessment. Intentions to be screened and screening behaviors did not differ between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, a PDA delivered to clients of tobacco quit lines improved informed decision-making about lung cancer screening. Many smokers eligible for lung cancer screening can be reached through tobacco quit lines. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02286713.
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.