ArticleJAMA network open2024
Patient Lung Cancer Screening Decisions and Environmental and Psychosocial Factors.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and implementation challenges of mobile low-dose computed tomography units for early lung cancer detection: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- A Multilevel Approach to Improve Participation in Low-Dose CT for Lung Cancer Screening (Empower LCS): A Single-Arm Pilot Feasibility Clinical Trial.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2026Trial
- Self-Perceived Individual Health Responsibility Among Healthcare Workers: Associated Factors and Relationship with Preventive Behaviors-A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Impact of social determinants on the development, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer: recommended public health interventions.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Utilizing the NIMHD framework to explore barriers and facilitators to lung cancer screening among Black adults in NYC.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- "I Was Expecting the Worst": Exploring Barriers and Facilitators to Lung Cancer Screening in Black and Hispanic Communities.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Process perspectives on lung cancer screening in primary care: a qualitative study of providers and staff in an urban U.S. healthcare system.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Utilizing the NIMHD Framework to Explore Barriers and Facilitators to Lung Cancer Screening Among Black Adults in NYC.Research square · 2026Article
- Assessing Factors Associated With Patient-Provider Discussions About Lung Cancer Screening Using Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Utilization.Clinical lung cancer · 2025Article
- Screening for Lung Cancer, Overdiagnosis, and Healthcare Utilization: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2025Article
- Equity and Opportunities in Lung Cancer Care-Addressing Disparities, Challenges, and Pathways Forward.Cancers · 2025Review
- Racism, discrimination, medical mistrust, stigma, and lung cancer screening: a scoping review.Ethnicity & health · 2025Article
- Social Risks and Nonadherence to Recommended Cancer Screening Among US Adults.JAMA network open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Screening for lung cancer using low-dose computed tomography is associated with reduced lung cancer-specific mortality, but uptake is low in the US; understanding how patients make decisions to engage with lung cancer screening is critical for increasing uptake. Prior research has focused on individual-level psychosocial factors, but environmental factors (eg, historical contexts that include experiencing racism) and modifying factors-those that can be changed to make it easier or harder to undergo screening-also likely affect screening decisions. Objective: To investigate environmental, psychosocial, and modifying factors influencing lung cancer screening decision-making and develop a conceptual framework depicting relationships between these factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multimethod qualitative study was conducted from December 2021 to June 2022 using virtual semistructured interviews and 4 focus groups (3-4 participants per group). All participants met US Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening (ie, age 50-80 years, at least a 20 pack-year smoking history, and either currently smoke or quit within the past 15 years). Screening-eligible US participants were recruited using an online panel. Main Outcomes and Measures: Key factors influencing screening decisions (eg, knowledge, beliefs, barriers, and facilitators) were the main outcome. A theory-informed, iterative inductive-deductive approach was applied to analyze data and develop a conceptual framework summarizing results. Results: Among 34 total participants (interviews, 20 [59%]; focus groups, 14 [41%]), mean (SD) age was 59.1 (4.8) years and 20 (59%) identified as female. Half had a household income below $20 000 (17 [50%]). Participants emphasized historical and present-day racism as critical factors contributing to mistrust of health care practitioners and avoidance of medical procedures like screening. Participants reported that other factors, such as public transportation availability, also influenced decisions. Additionally, participants described psychosocial processes involved in decisions, such as perceived screening benefits, lung cancer risk appraisal, and fear of a cancer diagnosis or harmful encounters with practitioners. In addition, participants identified modifying factors (eg, insurance coverage) that could make receiving screening easier or harder. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study of patient lung cancer screening decisions, environmental, psychosocial, and modifying factors influenced screening decisions. The findings suggest that systems-level interventions, such as those that help practitioners understand and discuss patients' prior negative health care experiences, are needed to promote effective screening decision-making.
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.