Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38571494›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024

Understanding the perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action for lung cancer screening among Latinos: A qualitative study.

Edgar I Alaniz-Cantú, Kalese Goodwin, London Smith, Eliany Acosta, Arlette Chávez-Iñiguez, Mary Jo Evans, Marcela Gaitán, Fang Lei, Reza Yousefi-Nooraie, Kevin A Fiscella and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Engaging Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Communities to Prepare for Lung Cancer Screening Implementation in Australia: A Qualitative Focus Group Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

13 authors.

Edgar I Alaniz-CantúDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Kalese GoodwinDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
London SmithDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Eliany AcostaDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Arlette Chávez-IñiguezDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Mary Jo EvansImaging Population Health Programs, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Marcela GaitánNational Alliance for Hispanic Health, Washington, DC, United States.
Fang LeiSchool of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Reza Yousefi-NooraieDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Kevin A FiscellaDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
M Patricia RiveraDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Ana Paula CupertinoDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Francisco Cartujano-BarreraDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.

Funding

The University of Rochester's Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR002001 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI WILSON, KAREN M., ZAND, MARTIN S · 2016 to 2024
$34.6M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Rates of lung cancer screening among Latinos remain low. The purpose of the study was to understand the perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action for lung cancer screening among Latinos. Methods: Participants (N=20) were recruited using community-based recruitment strategies. Eligibility criteria included: 1) self-identified as Hispanic/Latino, 2) spoke English and/or Spanish, and 3) met the USA Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening. Interviews were conducted in Spanish and English, audio recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Using the health belief model, a qualitative theoretical analysis was used to analyze the interviews. Results: Participants' mean age was 58.3 years old (SD=5.8), half of the participants were female, 55% had completed high school or lower educational level, and 55% reported speaking more Spanish than English. All participants were currently smoking. Fourteen participants (70%) were unaware of lung cancer screening, and eighteen (90%) did not know they were eligible for lung cancer screening. Regarding lung cancer screening, participants reported multiple perceived benefits (e.g., smoking cessation, early detection of lung cancer, increased survivorship) and barriers (e.g., fear of outcomes, cost, lung cancer screening not being recommended by their clinician). Lastly, multiple cues to actions for lung cancer screening were identified (e.g., family as a cue to action for getting screened). Conclusions: Most Latinos who were eligible for lung cancer screening were unaware of it and, when informed, they reported multiple perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action. These factors provide concrete operational strategies to address lung cancer screening among Latinos.

Indexed as

HispanicsLatinoslung cancerlung cancer disparitieslung cancer screening

Identifiers

PMID38571494
PMCPMC10987732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.