ArticleJAMA network open2022
Factors Associated With Declining Lung Cancer Screening After Discussion With a Physician in a Cohort of US Veterans.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT04574518 (Teachable Moment to Opt-out of Tobacco), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 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.
Teachable Moment to Opt-out of Tobacco (TeaM OUT): A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Intervention
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Facilitators and barriers of lung cancer screening participation: umbrella and systematic review of the global evidence.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Estimating Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility in the Veterans Health Administration Using Patient-Reported Smoking Histories.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Lung cancer screening in occupational settings: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- University of Pennsylvania Telehealth Research Center of Excellence.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2024Article
- Study rationale and design of the PEOPLHE trial.La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
- Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening CT After a Provider Order for Screening in the PROSPR-Lung Consortium.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Observational
- What Goes into Patient Selection for Lung Cancer Screening? Factors Associated with Clinician Judgments of Suitability for Screening.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2024Article
- The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Pediatric Medical Clinicians' Application of Fluoride Varnish.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Lung Cancer Screening Among U.S. Military Veterans by Health Status and Race and Ethnicity, 2017-2020: A Cross-Sectional Population-Based Study.AJPM focus · 2023Article
- Article
- Terminology Error.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- "It Can't Hurt!": Why Many Patients With Limited Life Expectancy Decide to Accept Lung Cancer Screening.Annals of family medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Lung cancer screening (LCS) is underused in the US, particularly in underserved populations, and little is known about factors associated with declining LCS. Guidelines call for shared decision-making when LCS is offered to ensure informed, patient-centered decisions. Objective: To assess how frequently veterans decline LCS and examine factors associated with declining LCS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included LCS-eligible US veterans who were offered LCS between January 1, 2013, and February 1, 2021, by a physician at 1 of 30 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities that routinely used electronic health record clinical reminders documenting LCS eligibility and veterans' decisions to accept or decline LCS. Data were obtained from the Veterans Affairs (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse or Medicare claims files from the VA Information Resource Center. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was documentation, in clinical reminders, that veterans declined LCS after a discussion with a physician. Logistic regression analyses with physicians and facilities as random effects were used to assess factors associated with declining LCS compared with agreeing to LCS. Results: Of 43 257 LCS-eligible veterans who were offered LCS (mean [SD] age, 64.7 [5.8] years), 95.9% were male, 84.2% were White, and 37.1% lived in a rural zip code; 32.0% declined screening. Veterans were less likely to decline LCS if they were younger (age 55-59 years: odds ratio [OR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64-0.74; age 60-64 years: OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.75-0.85), were Black (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87), were Hispanic (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.78), did not have to make co-payments (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.85-0.99), or had more frequent VHA health care utilization (outpatient: OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.67-0.72; emergency department: OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.92). Veterans were more likely to decline LCS if they were older (age 70-74 years: OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.19-1.37; age 75-80 years: OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.73-2.17), lived farther from a VHA screening facility (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.08), had spent more days in long-term care (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19), had a higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index score (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05), or had specific cardiovascular or mental health conditions (congestive heart failure: OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.12-1.39; stroke: OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.28; schizophrenia: OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.60-2.19). The physician and facility offering LCS accounted for 19% and 36% of the variation in declining LCS, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, older veterans with serious comorbidities were more likely to decline LCS and Black and Hispanic veterans were more likely to accept it. Variation in LCS decisions was accounted for more by the facility and physician offering LCS than by patient factors. These findings suggest that shared decision-making conversations in which patients play a central role in guiding care may enhance patient-centered care and address disparities in LCS.
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.