ArticleThe Permanente journal2021
Understanding Patient and Clinical Stakeholder Perspectives to Improve Adherence to Lung Cancer Screening.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Communication and Stepped Reminders Interventions for Lung Cancer Screening: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Engaging Patients in Learning Health Systems Research Using Human Centered Design: A Scoping Review.Learning health systems · 2026Article
- Article
- Navigating shared decision-making in lung cancer screening: Insights into barriers, training, and referral propensity among clinicians.Patient education and counseling · 2025Article
- Patient and nodule characteristics associated with adherence to lung cancer screening in a large integrated healthcare system.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A pragmatic randomized clinical trial of multilevel interventions to improve adherence to lung cancer screening (The Larch Study): Study protocol.Contemporary clinical trials · 2024Article
- Unpacking the relationship between shared decision-making and decisional quality, decision to screen, and screening completion in lung cancer screening.Patient education and counseling · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLimited evidence-based implementation strategies exist for maintaining lung cancer screening. We evaluated the Lung Cancer Screening Program at Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA) to develop multilevel interventions to improve screening adherence.
methodsWe conducted a concurrent mixed-methods study 1) to measure adherence to repeat screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT); 2) to interview KPWA stakeholders to understand the Lung Cancer Screening Program; and 3) to conduct codesign workshops with KPWA members and researchers. We used descriptive statistics to describe adherence, and rapid qualitative data analysis for stakeholder interviews and workshops.
resultsBetween 2015 and 2019, 2089 KPWA members had initial LDCT scans with negative, benign or short-interval follow-up results. Among those with sufficient follow-up, the proportion with on-time repeat screening after a negative LDCT was 26.4% after the initial scan, and increased to 43.1% on subsequent scans. Opportunities for health-care system improvement included clarification of clinical roles and responsibilities, care coordination across providers, ongoing training in lung cancer screening, and revising electronic health record tools. From patient perspectives, facilitators to repeat screening were making screening personalized and convenient; offering consistent messages and reminders in different modes; increasing patient knowledge about benefits, harms, and expectations of LDCT; and providing nonfinancial and financial incentives for adherence. From a storyboard exercise, we identified 10 design features for lung cancer screening interventions, including versatility of communication, social support, and knowledge.
conclusionWe identified clear gaps in adherence to lung cancer screenings, organizational and clinical barriers to care, and design features for patient-centered interventions to improve lung cancer screening in US settings.
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.