ArticleBMC public health2022
Increasing uptake to a lung cancer screening programme: building with communities through co-design.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Early cancer diagnosis and community pharmacies: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of the scope and impact of rural primary healthcare innovations using digital health technology.BMJ open · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring Whether and How People Experiencing High Deprivation Access Diagnostic Services: A Qualitative Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Facilitators and Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening during Long COVID: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-Study Synthesis of Qualitative Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Pooled it
- Co-Production of A Culturally Tailored Sarcopenia Screening Programme for Older Adults in Luton, UK: A Mixed-Methods Feasibility Study Protocol.Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls · 2026Article
- 'You've Given Me My Voice'-Enhancing Engagement in Exercise Oncology Research: A Patient and Public Involvement Approach to Co‑Designing a Pre‑Radiotherapy Exercise Programme With People Living With Lung Cancer.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Who is left out? A systematic review on the barriers and facilitators for screening participation reported by people in vulnerable situations with strategies for the future.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Review
- Enhancing lung cancer screening through 'saved by the scan': insights from a multipronged public service advertising campaign.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Community co-design of research intervention materials to reduce cervical cancer disparities in Appalachia.PEC innovation · 2025Article
- Empowering Recovery: A Co-Designed Intervention to Transform Care for Operable Lung Cancer.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review.Preventive medicine · 2024Article
- Racial Disparities in Lung Cancer Stage of Diagnosis Among Adults Living in the Southeastern United States.Chest · 2023Observational
- Co-designing a recruitment strategy for lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals: protocol for a mixed-methods study.HRB open research · 2023Article
- Understanding patient barriers and facilitators to uptake of lung screening using low dose computed tomography: a mixed methods scoping review of the current literature.Respiratory research · 2022Article
- Interest in genetic testing and risk-reducing behavioral changes: results from a community health assessment in New York City.Journal of community genetics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death in the UK. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been shown to identify lung cancer at an earlier stage. A risk stratified approach to LDCT referral is recommended. Those at higher risk of developing lung cancer (aged 55 + , smoker, deprived area) are least likely to participate in such a programme and, therefore, it is necessary to understand the barriers they face and to develop pathways for implementation in order to increase uptake.
methodsA 2-phased co-design process was employed to identify ways to further increase opportunity for uptake of a lung cancer screening programme, using a risk indicator for LDCT referral, amongst people who could benefit most. Participants were members of the public at high risk from developing lung cancer and professionals who may provide or signpost to a future lung cancer screening programme. Phase 1: interviews and focus groups, considering barriers, facilitators and pathways for provision. Phase 2: interactive offline booklet and online surveys with professionals. Qualitative data was analysed thematically, while descriptive statistics were conducted for quantitative data.
resultsIn total, ten barriers and eight facilitators to uptake of a lung cancer screening programme using a biomarker blood test for LDCT referral were identified. An additional four barriers and four facilitators to provision of such a programme were identified. These covered wider themes of acceptability, awareness, reminders and endorsement, convenience and accessibility. Various pathway options were evidenced, with choice being a key facilitator for uptake. There was a preference (19/23) for the provision of home test kits but 7 of the 19 would like an option for assistance, e.g. nurse, pharmacist or friend. TV was the preferred means of communicating about the programme and fear was the most dominant barrier perceived by members of the public.
conclusionCo-design has provided a fuller understanding of the barriers, facilitators and pathways for the provision of a future lung cancer screening programme, with a focus on the potential of biomarker blood tests for the identification of at-risk individuals. It has also identified possible solutions and future developments to enhance uptake, e.g. Embedding the service in communities, Effective communication, Overcoming barriers with options. Continuing the process to develop these solutions in a collaborative way helps to encourage the personalised approach to delivery that is likely to improve uptake amongst groups that could benefit most.
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.