ArticleJTO clinical and research reports2023
Health Care Utilization and Costs in Lung Cancer Screening Participants-A Propensity-Matched Economic Analysis.
Article in JTO clinical and research reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating interstitial lung abnormality detection into lung cancer screening: a mixed methods approach for care pathway development.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- Patterns of Medical Care Cost by Service Type Associated With Lung Cancer Screening.Medical care · 2025Article
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 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lung cancer screening (LCS) for high-risk populations has been firmly established to reduce lung cancer mortality, but concerns exist regarding unintended downstream costs. Methods: Mean health care utilization and costs were compared in the Alberta Lung Cancer Screening Study in a cohort undergoing LCS versus a propensity-matched control group who did not. Results: A cohort of 651 LCS participants was matched to 336 unscreened controls. Over the study period (mean 3.6 y), a modest increase in the number of claims (22.4 versus 21.9 per person-year [PY]; Δ 0.50 [95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.86], Conclusions: Modest increases in outpatient costs are noted in individuals undergoing LCS, in part attributable to the screening examinations, without differences in overall health care costs. Health care costs and utilization seem otherwise similar in individuals participating in LCS and those who do not.
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.