ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2025
Combined Breast and Lung Cancer Screening Among Dual-Eligible Women: A Descriptive Study.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The prevalence of primary lung cancer among women with previous personal and/or family history of cancer in an integrated health system.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Geospatial heterogeneity of hotspots for incidence and late-stage diagnosis of breast, colorectal, and lung cancer.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Reimagining lung screening in women.The British journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Beyond tobacco: understanding the growing burden of lung adenocarcinoma in women.Oncology reviews · 2026Review
- Bridging Mammography and Lung Cancer Screening: Eligibility, Uptake and Potential Impact.Cancer medicine · 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLung cancer is consistently the leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, yet lung cancer screening (LCS) rates remain low. By contrast, screening mammography rates are reliably high, suggesting that screening mammography can be a "teachable moment" to increase LCS uptake among dual-eligible women. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a prospective survey study conducted at two academic institutions. Patients undergoing screening mammography were evaluated for LCS eligibility and offered enrollment in a pilot dual-cancer screening program. A series of surveys was administered to characterize participants' knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes about LCS before and after undergoing dual screening. Data were descriptively summarized.
resultsBetween August 2022 and July 2023, 54 LCS-eligible patients were enrolled. The study cohort was 100% female and predominantly White (81%), with a median age of 57 y and median of 36 pack-y of smoking. Survey results showed that 98% felt they were at risk for lung cancer, with most (80%) motivated by early detection of potential cancer. Regarding screening barriers, 58% of patients lacked knowledge about LCS eligibility and 47% reported concerns about screening cost. Prior to undergoing LCS, 87% of patients expressed interest in combined breast and lung screening. Encouragingly, after LCS, 84% were likely or very likely to undergo dual screening again and 93% found the shared decision-making visit helpful or very helpful.
conclusionsPairing breast and LCS is a feasible, acceptable intervention that, along with increasing patient and provider education about LCS, can increase LCS uptake and reduce lung cancer mortality.
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.