Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32522753›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2020

Healthcare professionals' perspectives on lung cancer screening in the UK: a qualitative study.

Charikleia Margariti, Maria Kordowicz, Gillian Selman, Arjun Nair, Yvonne Akande, Azhar Saleem, Tiago Rua

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Attitudes towards the integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom: A qualitative study of individuals eligible to attend.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    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 at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Charikleia MargaritiResearch and Development Department, North East London NHS Foundation Trust, Essex, UK hara.margariti@nelft.nhs.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1371-7399
Maria KordowiczLincoln International Business School, University of Lincoln, Lincolnshire, UK.
Gillian SelmanGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Arjun NairUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Yvonne AkandeGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Azhar SaleemLambeth Clinical Commissioning Group, London, UK.
Tiago RuaKing's Health Economics, King's College London, London, UK.
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBLambeth Hospital · GBNorth East London NHS Foundation Trust · GBThe King's College · USUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Lincoln · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has been shown to decrease mortality. Low lung cancer survival rates in the UK, driven primarily by late-stage presentation, provide the impetus for implementing screening. Nascent guidance on screening in the UK recommends primary care case-finding. However, the potential impact and acceptability on primary care, and the opportunistic utilisation of other case-finding routes, such as pharmacies, smoking cessation services, and respiratory clinics, have not been fully explored.

aimTo explore healthcare professionals' views and perspectives about lung cancer screening and their preparedness and willingness to be involved in its implementation. DESIGN &

settingA qualitative study was carried out with semi-structured interviews conducted with GPs, pharmacists, staff from smoking cessation services within Southwark and Lambeth in London, and staff from respiratory clinics in Guys' and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust in London between April 2018 and December 2018.

methodSixteen participants were interviewed and the interview transcripts were analysed thematically.

resultsParticipants described lung cancer screening as an important diagnostic tool for capturing lung cancer at an earlier stage and in increasing survivorship. However, the majority expressed a lack of awareness and understanding, uncertainty and concerns about the validity of screening, and the potential impact on their patients and workload.

conclusionStudy participants had mixed opinions about lung cancer screening and expressed their concerns about its implementation. Addressing these concerns by providing resources and effective and detailed guidelines for their use may lead to greater engagement and willingness to be involved in lung cancer screening.

Indexed as

community carelung cancer screeninglung neoplasmsprimary health carequalitative researchsecondary care

Identifiers

PMID32522753
PMCPMC7465573
OpenAlexW3033934465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.