Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33433600›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Evaluation of Revised US Preventive Services Task Force Lung Cancer Screening Guideline Among Women and Racial/Ethnic Minority Populations.

Thomas J Reese, Chelsey R Schlechter, Lindsey N Potter, Kensaku Kawamoto, Guilherme Del Fiol, Cho Y Lam, David W Wetter

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07073898 (Population Health Management Approaches to Increase Lung Cancer Screening in Community Health Centers - UG3 Pilot Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT07073898 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Population Health Management Approaches to Increase Lung Cancer Screening in Community Health Centers - UG3 Pilot Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of UtahRan2025 to 2026Enrolled65ConditionsLung CancerArmsRepeated Text Messages (TM+), Conversational Agent (CA), Educational Video, Proactive Patient Navigation (PPN), Reactive Patient Navigation (RPN)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Effect of Patient Navigation on Completion of Lung Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Populations.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2024
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Inherited genetic risk factors in young-onset lung cancer.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Lung Cancer Screening Uptake under the Revised United States Preventive Services Task Force Guideline: Assessing Disparities.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas J ReeseDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Chelsey R SchlechterDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Lindsey N PotterDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Kensaku KawamotoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Guilherme Del FiolDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Cho Y LamDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
David W WetterDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
University of Utah · US

Funding

UTAH REGIONAL CANCER CENTERP30CA042014 · NCI · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI KATHARINE S ULLMAN · 1986 to 2026
$72.6M
Utah Center for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR002538 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI HESS, RACHEL, MAJERSIK, JENNIFER JUHL · 2018 to 2022
$26.0M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002540 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI FAGERLIN, ANGELA, FAIRFAX, KEKE CELESTE · 2018 to 2022
$1.6M
Scalable decision support and shared decision making for lung cancer screeningR18HS026198 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI KAWAMOTO, KENSAKU · 2019 to 2021
$1.2M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS026198NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002540NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002538NCI NIH HHS P30 CA042014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Lung cancer incidence and mortality disproportionately affect women and racial/ethnic minority populations, yet screening guidelines for the past several years were derived from clinical trials of predominantly White men. To reflect current evidence, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has revised the eligibility criteria, which may help to ameliorate sex- and race/ethnicity-related disparities in lung cancer screening. Objective: To determine the changes associated with the revised USPSTF guideline for lung cancer screening eligibility among female, Black, and Hispanic populations using a large nationwide survey. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included respondents to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System who were 50 to 80 years of age with a smoking history in 19 states that used the optional lung cancer screening module. The change in eligibility among female, male, Black, Hispanic, and White participants was examined. Eligibility by sex and race/ethnicity was compared with a reference population. Data were collected from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018, and analyzed from May 8 to June 11, 2020. Exposures: Self-reported sex, race/ethnicity, age, and smoking history. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lung cancer screening eligibility using the revised USPSTF criteria. The previous criteria included current or past smokers (within 15 years) who were 55 to 80 years of age and had a smoking history of more than 30 pack-years. In the revised criteria, age was modified to 50 to 80 years; smoking history, to 20 pack-years. Results: Among 40 869 respondents aged 50 to 80 years with a smoking history, 21 265 (52.0%) were women, 3430 (8.4%) were Black, and 1226 (30.0%) were Hispanic (mean [SD] age, 65.6 [7.9] years). The revised criteria increased eligibility for the following populations: men (29.4% to 38.3% [8.9% difference]; P < .001), women (25.9% to 36.4% [10.5% difference]; P < .001), White individuals (31.1% to 40.9% [9.8% difference]; P < .001), Black individuals (16.3% to 28.8% [12.5% difference]; P < .001), and Hispanic individuals (10.5% to 18.7% [8.2% difference]; P < .001). The odds of eligibility were lower for women compared with men (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.99; P = .04) and for Black (AOR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.33-0.56; P < .001) and Hispanic populations (AOR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.62-0.80; P < .001) compared with the White population. Conclusions and Relevance: The revised USPSTF guideline may likely increase lung cancer screening rates for female, Black, and Hispanic populations. However, despite these potential improvements, lung cancer screening inequities may persist without tailored eligibility criteria.

Indexed as

EthnicityPractice Guidelines as TopicWomenAdvisory CommitteesCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMass ScreeningMinority GroupsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID33433600
PMCPMC7804914
OpenAlexW3118832129

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.