ArticleBMJ open2020
Impact of low-dose CT screening for lung cancer on ethnic health inequities in New Zealand: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening: insights from risk stratification, guidelines, and emerging technologies-a systematic review.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Lung Cancer Screening Participation Among Indigenous Peoples Worldwide: A Systematic Review of Challenges and Opportunities.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025Pooled it
- Population-Based Screening Using Low-Dose Chest Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Pooled it
- EarlyCDT Lung blood test for risk classification of solid pulmonary nodules: systematic review and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lung Cancer Screening Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review Assessing Strategy Comparison and Risk Stratification.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2022Pooled it
- Pulmonary nodules: classification, biomarkers, signaling pathways, diseases, early diagnosis and management.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Epigenetic Profiling for Early Detection and Treatment Response Monitoring in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Protocol for a Prospective Translational Biomarker Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- The FrEEIA readiness assessment tool: an evidence-informed pro-equity readiness assessment tool adapted in Aotearoa New Zealand for the implementation of health interventions.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Te Oranga Pūkahukahu research programme: intentional steps towards a national equity-focused lung cancer screening programme in Aotearoa New Zealand.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025Article
- Indigenous access to clinical services along the lung cancer treatment pathway: a review of current evidence.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screenings for Lung Cancer in High-Risk Populations: A Markov Model.World journal of oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Lung Cancer Screening Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography Based on Start Age and Interval in China: Modeling Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Article
- Lung Cancer Attracts Greater Stigma than Other Cancer Types in Aotearoa New Zealand.Journal of oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThere are large inequities in the lung cancer burden for the Indigenous Māori population of New Zealand. We model the potential lifetime health gains, equity impacts and cost-effectiveness of a national low-dose CT (LDCT) screening programme for lung cancer in smokers aged 55-74 years with a 30 pack-year history, and for formers smokers who have quit within the last 15 years.
designA Markov macrosimulation model estimated: health benefits (health-adjusted life-years (HALYs)), costs and cost-effectiveness of biennial LDCT screening. Input parameters came from literature and NZ-linked health datasets.
settingNew Zealand.
participantsPopulation aged 55-74 years in 2011.
interventionsBiennial LDCT screening for lung cancer compared with usual care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated using the average difference in costs and HALYs between the screened and the unscreened populations. Equity analyses included substituting non-Māori values for Māori values of background morbidity, mortality and stage-specific survival. Changes in inequities in lung cancer survival and 'health-adjusted life expectancy' (HALE) were measured.
resultsLDCT screening in NZ is likely to be cost-effective for the total population: NZ$34 400 per HALY gained (95% uncertainty interval NZ$27 500 to NZ$42 900) and for Māori separately (using a threshold of gross domestic product per capita NZ$45 000). Health gains per capita for Māori females were twice that for non-Māori females and 25% greater for Māori males compared with non-Māori males. LDCT screening will narrow absolute inequities in HALE and lung cancer mortality for Māori, but will slightly increase relative inequities in mortality from lung cancer (compared with non-Māori) due to differential stage-specific survival.
conclusionA national biennial LDCT lung cancer screening programme in New Zealand is likely to be cost-effective, will improve total population health and reduce health inequities for Māori. Attention must be paid to addressing ethnic inequities in stage-specific lung cancer survival.
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.