ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2021
Public opinion on implementing the National Lung Cancer Screening Program in Korea.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Risk of Subsequent Primary Cancers Among Adult-Onset 5-Year Cancer Survivors in South Korea: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Are current lung cancer screening guidelines and programs racially biased?Translational lung cancer research · 2023Article
- Why is the screening rate in lung cancer still low? A seven-country analysis of the factors affecting adoption.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Lung Cancer Screening: Implementation Challenges and Health Equity Considerations For the Western Pacific Region.JCO global oncology · 2023Review
- Lung cancer screening-Marching along ….Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer screening for high-risk population using low-dose computed tomography is a valid strategy to reduce lung cancer mortality. This study investigated public opinions toward the initiation and participation in the National Lung Cancer Screening Program (NLCSP) launched in Korea.
methodsIn this cross-sectional analysis of the 2018 Korean National Cancer Screening Survey, we analyzed the responses related to lung cancer screening. Eligible participants for NLCSP are aged 55‒74 years with at least 30 pack-years of smoking history. We compared public opinions on implementing lung cancer screening according to smoking status and eligibility for NLCSP.
resultsAmong 3,495 respondents, 205 (5.9%) were eligible for screening. Most of the respondents (71.2%) agreed with implementing NLCSP. Agreement rates were relatively lower in never smokers (66.2%) and higher in former (80.8%) and current smokers (82.3%). Factors associated with agreement included the presence of private health insurance [odds ratio (OR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-1.78], regular health checkup (OR 2.10, 95% CI, 1.72-2.57), and smoking history (former, OR 1.66, 95% CI, 1.09-2.55; current, OR 1.97, 95% CI, 1.45-2.67). Preference of the screening facilities showed that quality was considered more important than accessibility (46.9%
conclusionsPublic agreement and active participation of the eligible population are key factors in the successful implementation of NLCSP. Our data would be a valuable resource in building appropriate strategies to maximize the benefits of nationwide lung cancer screening.
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.