Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35894098›Full record

ArticleHealth & social care in the community2022

Emotions and lung cancer screening: Prioritising a humanistic approach to care.

Rebecca E Olson, Lisa Goldsmith, Sara Winter, Elizabeth Spaulding, Nicola Dunn, Sarah Mander, Alyssa Ryan, Alexandra Smith, Henry M Marshall

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health & social care in the community, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. "Because That is the Right Thing to do": A Focus Group Study of Australian Expert Perspectives on Offering Smoking Cessation Support in Lung Cancer Screening.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Rebecca E OlsonSchool of Social Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7721-8708
Lisa GoldsmithThe Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Queensland, Australia.
Sara WinterSchool of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Mt Gravatt, Queensland, Australia.
Elizabeth SpauldingTickle College of Engineering, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Nicola DunnThe Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Queensland, Australia.
Sarah ManderPsychology Department, The Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Queensland, Australia.
Alyssa RyanCancer Care Services, The Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Queensland, Australia.
Alexandra SmithSchool of Social Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8550-6849
Henry M MarshallUniversity of Queensland Thoracic Research Centre and Department of Thoracic Medicine, The Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9626-8014
Prince Charles Hospital · AUThe University of Queensland · AUGriffith University · AUKnoxville College · US

Funding

Cancer Research UK
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening has mortality benefits. Yet, uptake has been low. To inform strategies to better deliver and promote screening, in 2018, we interviewed 27 long-term smokers immediately following lung cancer screening in Australia, prior to receiving scan results. Existing lung screening studies employ the Health Belief Model. Reflecting growing acknowledgement of the centrality of emotions to screening uptake, we draw on psychological and sociological theories on emotions to thematically and abductively analyse the emotional dimensions of lung cancer screening, with implications for screening promotion and delivery. As smokers, interviewees described feeling stigmatised, with female participants internalising and male participants resisting stigma. Guilt and fear related to lung cancer were described as screening motivators. The screening itself elicited mild positive emotions. Notably, interviewees expressed gratitude for the care implicitly shown through lung screening to smokers. More than individual risk assessment, findings suggest lung screening campaigns should prioritise emotions. Peer workers have been found to increase cancer screening uptake in marginalised communities, however the risk to confidentiality-especially for female smokers-limits its feasibility in lung cancer screening. Instead, we suggest involving peer consultants in developing targeted screening strategies that foreground emotions. Furthermore, findings suggest prioritising humanistic care in lung screening delivery. Such an approach may be especially important for smokers from low socioeconomic backgrounds, who perceive lung cancer screening and smoking as sources of stigma and face a higher risk of dying from lung cancer and lower engagement with screening.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsEmotionsFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningSmokersSmokingcancer screeningemotions in healthcarelung cancersmokingsociology

Identifiers

PMID35894098
PMCPMC10947369
OpenAlexW4288176095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.