Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33289828›Full record

ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2021

Successes and challenges of implementing a lung cancer screening program in federally qualified health centers: a qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Caitlin G Allen, Megan M Cotter, Robert A Smith, Lesley Watson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Caitlin G AllenDepartment of Behavioral Science and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Megan M CotterPopulation Sciences Department, American Cancer Society, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9268-9869
Robert A SmithPrevention and Early Detection Team, American Cancer Society, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA.
Lesley WatsonStrategy and Analytics Team, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Inc., Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

Improving Family Cancer History Collection using Social Network, Human Centered Design, and Implementation Science ApproachesK00CA253576 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI ALLEN, CAITLIN GLOECKNER · 2020 to 2024
$443k
NCI NIH HHS K00 CA253576
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, studies have shown that low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is a safe and effective way to screen high-risk adults for lung cancer. Despite this, uptake remains low, especially in limited-resource settings. The American Cancer Society (ACS) partnered with two federally qualified health centers and accredited screening facilities on a 2 year pilot project to implement an LDCT screening program. Both sites attempted to develop a referral program and care coordination practices to move patients through the screening continuum and identify critical facilitators and barriers to implementation. Evaluators conducted key informant interviews (N = 46) with clinical and administrative staff, as well as regional ACS staff during annual site visits. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided our analysis of factors associated with effective implementation and improved screening outcomes. One study site established a sustainable lung screening program, while the other struggled to overcome significant implementation barriers. Increased time spent with patients, disruption to normal workflows, and Medicaid reimbursement policies presented challenges at both sites. Supportive, engaged leaders and knowledgeable champions who provided clear implementation guidance improved staff engagement and were able to train, guide, and motivate staff throughout the intervention. A slow, stepwise implementation process allowed one site's project champions to pilot test new processes and resolve issues before scaling up. This pilot study provides critical insights into the necessary resources and steps for successful lung cancer screening program implementation in underserved settings. Future efforts can build upon these findings and identify and address possible facilitators and barriers to screening program implementation.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsHumansMass ScreeningMedicaidPilot ProjectsUnited StatesCancerCancer screeningEvaluationImplementation scienceLung cancerPulmonology

Identifiers

PMID33289828
PMCPMC8248958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.