SynthesisAmerican journal of preventive medicine2024
Digital Interventions to Support Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in American journal of preventive medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Lung cancer screening completion among patients using decision aids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Pooled it
- Health Communication and Stepped Reminders Interventions for Lung Cancer Screening: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Mixed-Method Formative Evaluation and Cultural Adaptation of Digital Health Communication Content and Delivery Promoting Lung Cancer Screening Shared Decision-Making.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterTrial
- TikTok, Xiaohongshu, and Bilibili as sources of medical information on lung cancer: a multi-platform content evaluation.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Pretest-posttest trial of a lung cancer screening decision aid for individuals with multimorbidity from a primary care population.PEC innovation · 2026Article
- Article
- Enhancing lung cancer screening through 'saved by the scan': insights from a multipronged public service advertising campaign.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Using AI to Design and Develop Online Educational Modules to Enhance Lung Cancer Screening Uptake Among High-Risk Individuals.Cancers · 2026Article
- Article
- Interventions targeted to improve lung cancer screening uptake among high-risk individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- "It's coming whether we want it to or not": A qualitative exploration of older adults' comfort with and perceptions of technology and digital health.Research square · 2025Article
- A Novel Automated Algorithm to Identify Lung Cancer Screening from Free Text of Radiology Orders.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Bibliometric Analysis on of the Impact of Screening to Minimize Maternal Mental Health on Neonatal Outcomes: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLung cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) can reduce lung cancer mortality, but its adoption in the U.S. has been limited. Digital interventions have the potential to improve uptake of LCS. This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of digital interventions in promoting LCS.
methodsA systematic search of three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Medline) was conducted to identify studies published between January 2014 and May 2023. Studies were reviewed and abstracted between February 2023 and July 2023. Outcomes related to knowledge, decision-making and screening were measured. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools.
resultsOf 1,979 screened articles, 30 studies were included in this review. Digital interventions evaluated included decision aids (n=20), electronic health record (EHR)-based interventions (n=7), social media campaigns and mobile applications (n=3). Decision aids were the most commonly studied digital interventions, with most studies showing improved knowledge (13/13) and reduced decisional conflict (7/9) but most did not show a substantial change in screening use. Fewer studies tested clinician-facing or multi-level interventions. DISCUSSION: Digital interventions, particularly decision aids, have shown promise in improving knowledge and the quality of decision-making around LCS. However, few interventions have been shown to substantially alter screening behavior and few clinician-facing or multi-level interventions have been rigorously tested. Further research is needed to develop effective tools for engaging patients in LCS, to compare the efficacy of different interventions, and evaluate implementation strategies in diverse healthcare 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.