ArticleBMJ open2020
Psychosocial consequences of false positives in the Danish Lung Cancer CT Screening Trial: a nested matched cohort study.
Article in BMJ 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 NCT00496977 (Screening for Lung Cancer. A Randomised Controlled Trial of Low-Dose CT-Scanning.), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 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.
Screening for Lung Cancer. A Randomised Controlled Trial of Low-Dose CT-Scanning.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Participant factors associated with psychosocial impacts of lung cancer screening: A systematic review.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- The impact of screening-detected atrial fibrillation and associated outcomes on quality of life.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Validation of the psychosocial consequences of screening in lung cancer questionnaire in the international lung screen trial Australian cohort.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Trial
- Effectiveness of Educational Videos in Encouraging Preferences for Guideline-Based Cancer Screening in Japan: Three-Arm Pseudorandomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Personalizing lung cancer screening recommendations for heterogeneous populations: a microsimulation study.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Analysis and application of a machine learning-based assisted diagnosis method for myofascial pelvic pain syndrome.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Structured narrative review on lung cancer screening: current evidence, clinical practice implications and implementation insights from a multidisciplinary task force and patient representatives.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Review
- Performance comparison of four published lung cancer prediction models applied to a cohort from the National Lung Screening Trial.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Article
- Trust, Trustworthiness, and the Future of Medical AI: Outcomes of an Interdisciplinary Expert Workshop.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Modelling the cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with HPV self-sampling and molecular triage for women aged 60-69 years.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Downstream healthcare use following breast cancer screening: a register-based cohort study.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2025Article
- A Novel Method for 3D Lung Tumor Reconstruction Using Generative Models.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- How will lung cancer screening and lung nodule management change the diagnostic and surgical lung cancer landscape?European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Review
- The paradox of MRI for breast cancer screening: high-risk and dense breasts-available evidence and current practice.Insights into imaging · 2024Review
- Health State Utilities Associated with False-Positive Cancer Screening Results.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2024Article
- How do (false) positively screened patients experience a screening programme for liver cirrhosis or fibrosis in Germany? A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Swiss Pilot Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screening Study: First Baseline Screening Results.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Artificial Intelligence Techniques to Predict the Airway Disorders Illness: A Systematic Review.Archives of computational methods in engineering : state of the art reviews · 2023Review
- False Atrial Fibrillation Alerts from Smartwatches are Associated with Decreased Perceived Physical Well-being and Confidence in Chronic Symptoms Management.Cardiology and cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLung cancer CT screening can reduce lung cancer mortality, but high false-positive rates may cause adverse psychosocial consequences. The aim was to analyse the psychosocial consequences of false-positive lung cancer CT screening using the lung cancer screening-specific questionnaire, Consequences of Screening in Lung Cancer (COS-LC). DESIGN AND
settingThis study was a matched cohort study, nested in the randomised Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST).
participantsOur study included all 130 participants in the DLCST with positive CT results in screening rounds 2-5, who had completed the COS-LC questionnaire. Participants were split into a true-positive and a false-positive group and were then matched 1:2 with a control group (n=248) on sex, age (±3 years) and the time of screening for the positive CT groups or clinic visit for the control group. The true positives and false positives were also matched 1:2 with participants with negative CT screening results (n=252). PRIMARY OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes were psychosocial consequences measured at five time points.
resultsFalse positives experienced significantly more negative psychosocial consequences in seven outcomes at 1 week and in three outcomes at 1 month compared with the control group and the true-negative group (mean ∆ score >0 and p<0.001). True positives experienced significantly more negative psychosocial consequences in one outcome at 1 week (mean ∆ score 2.86 (95% CI 1.01 to 4.70), p=0.0024) and in five outcomes at 1 month (mean ∆ score >0 and p<0.004) compared with the true-negative group and the control group. No long-term psychosocial consequences were identified either in false positives or true positives.
conclusionsReceiving a false-positive result in lung cancer screening was associated with negative short-term psychosocial consequences. These findings contribute to the evidence on harms of screening and should be taken into account when considering implementation of lung cancer screening programmes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00496977.
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.