ArticleCancer2022
Lung cancer screening use and implications of varying eligibility criteria by race and ethnicity: 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data.
Article in Cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use and impact of risk-based eligibility models in low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening: a systematic review.Public health reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Racial inequalities in eligibility and access to lung cancer screening: systematic review of United States studies.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Providing Reminders and Education Prior to lung cancer screening: Feasibility and acceptability of a multilevel approach to address disparities in lung cancer screening.Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Trial
- A Randomized Trial of Telephone-Based Smoking Cessation Treatment in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2022Trial
- Veteran Satisfaction With Lung Cancer Screening Care: A Cross-Sectional Evaluation.Medical care · 2026Article
- Demographic shifts in referral to and completion of lung cancer screening after the 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force update.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact of a text messaging intervention to increase the uptake of lung cancer screening among Latinos: single-arm pilot study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Analysis of Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Among Patients Diagnosed With Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2026Article
- Lung cancer screening completion rates and neighborhood disadvantage among primary care patients in an integrated delivery network health system: a retrospective data analysis.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Past hurts, present hurdles: Analyzing the impact of adult socioeconomic status and healthcare access on cancer screening among childhood abuse survivors.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Lung Cancer Screening by Nativity Among Latino Community Health Center Patients.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025Article
- Characteristics of the Newly Eligible Population under Two Recent Updates of Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- National Survey of Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility in United States Veterans.American journal of preventive medicine · 2025Article
- Trends in Cancer-Screening Rates in Korea: Findings from the National Cancer Screening Survey, 2004-2023.Cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Review
- Estimating the Effects of Cancer Screening in Clinical Practice Settings: The Role of Selective Uptake and Suboptimal Adherence along the Cancer Screening Continuum.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
- Persistent race- and sex-based disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2024Article
- Lung cancer screening provider recommendation and completion in black and White patients with a smoking history in two healthcare systems: a survey study.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Exploring shared decision-making needs in lung cancer screening among high-risk groups and health care providers in China: a qualitative study.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Trends in smoking-attributable and smoking-unrelated lung cancer death rates in the United States, 1991-2018.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) expanded the eligibility criteria for low-dose computed tomographic lung cancer screening (LCS) to reduce racial disparities that resulted from the 2013 USPSTF criteria. The annual LCS rate has risen slowly since the 2013 USPSTF screening recommendations. Using the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), this study 1) describes LCS use in 2019, 2) compares the percent eligible for LCS using the 2013 versus 2021 USPSTF criteria, and 3) determines the percent eligible using the more detailed PLCOm2012
methodsThe analysis included 41,544 individuals with a smoking history from states participating in the BRFSS LCS module who were ≥50 years old.
resultsUsing the 2013 USPSTF criteria, 20.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.0-22.4) of eligible individuals underwent LCS in 2019. The 2013 USPSTF criteria was compared to the 2021 USPSTF criteria, and the overall proportion eligible increased from 21.0% (95% CI, 20.2-21.8) to 34.7% (95 CI, 33.8-35.6). Applying the 2021 criteria, the proportion eligible by race was 35.8% (95% CI, 34.8-36.7) among Whites, 28.5% (95% CI, 25.2-31.9) among Blacks, and 18.0% (95% CI, 12.4-23.7) among Hispanics. Using the 1.0% 6-year threshold that is comparable to the 2021 USPSTF criteria, the PLCOm2012
conclusionsUsing data from 20 states and using multiple imputation, higher LCS rates have been reported compared to prior BRFSS data. The 2021 expanded criteria will result in a greater number of screen-eligible individuals. However, risk-based screening that uses additional risk factors may be more inclusive overall and across subgroups. LAY SUMMARY: In 2013, lung cancer screening (lung screening) was recommended for high risk individuals. The annual rate of lung screening has risen slowly, particularly among Black individuals. In part, this racial disparity resulted in expanded 2021 criteria. Survey data was used to: 1) describe the number of people screened in 2019, 2) compare the percent eligible for lung screening using the 2013 versus 2021 guidelines, and 3) determine the percent eligible using more detailed criteria. Lung screening rates increased in 2019, and the 2021 criteria will result in more individuals eligible for screening. Using additional criteria may identify more individuals eligible for lung 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.