Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39243356›Full record

ArticleNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2025

"Because That is the Right Thing to do": A Focus Group Study of Australian Expert Perspectives on Offering Smoking Cessation Support in Lung Cancer Screening.

Nathan J Harrison, Rachael H Dodd, Ashleigh R Sharman, Henry M Marshall, Emily Stone, Joel J Rhee, Mei Ling Yap, Sue McCullough, Christine Paul, Jacqueline A Bowden and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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
  4. 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

12 authors.

Nathan J HarrisonFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1011-8745
Rachael H DoddThe Daffodil Centre, a joint venture between The University of Sydney and Cancer Council NSW, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Ashleigh R SharmanSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Henry M MarshallNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence on Achieving the Tobacco Endgame, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9626-8014
Emily StoneDepartment of Thoracic Medicine and Lung Transplantation, St. Vincent's Hospital Sydney, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Joel J RheeDiscipline of General Practice, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Mei Ling YapSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sue McCulloughConsumer Panel, Thoracic Oncology Group of Australasia, Thornbury, VIC, Australia.
Christine PaulSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Jacqueline A BowdenFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1983-8930
Billie BonevskiFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Nicole M RankinSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

Flinders UniversityMedical Research Future Fund Grant 2008603Metro North Hospital and Health ServiceNational Health and Medical Research Council 1185390NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence on Achieving the Tobacco Endgame 1198301NHMRC Investigator Grant 1178331NHMRC Project Grant 1160245
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLung cancer screening (LCS) trials, targeting people with a smoking history, have demonstrated reduced mortality. How to optimally embed evidence-based smoking cessation support in LCS, including in Australia, needs to be better understood. We sought experts' perspectives to identify potential barriers and effective implementation strategies. AIMS AND

methodsPerceptions of providing smoking cessation support in LCS were elicited in 24 focus groups and three individual interviews with clinicians, cancer screening program managers/policymakers, and researchers during 2021. We conducted framework analysis and mapped key topics to the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

resultsExperts (N = 84 participants) strongly supported capitalizing on an "opportune time" for smoking cessation and new LCS participant contact opportunities throughout the screening and assessment pathway. Many advocated for adapting existing cessation resources to the LCS setting and providing support without participant costs. Experts generally considered referral alone to established programs (eg, telephone Quitline) as insufficient, but likely helpful in follow-up, and dedicated cessation specialist roles as essential. Broader cessation messaging (via mass media/community channels) was also suggested to reinforce individualized support. Experts described inherent alignment, and an ethical responsibility, to deliver smoking cessation as a core LCS component. It was suggested that LCS-eligible participants' varied experiences of stigma, health literacy, and motivation, be considered in cessation support. Primary care support and individualized interventions were suggested to facilitate implementation.

conclusionsExperts considered smoking cessation support essential in LCS. The expert-identified and multi-level implementation strategies described here can directly inform smoking cessation-specific planning for Australia's forthcoming National LCS Program. IMPLICATIONS: The international literature includes few examples considering how best to provide smoking cessation support within a LCS program in advance of program commencement. Our analysis, using the updated CFIR, is one of the first to explore experts' perspectives within this context. Experts identified multiple implementation barriers to providing smoking cessation support within and outside of an Australian LCS program, including key work infrastructure barriers, and advocated for providing tailored interventions within this program. Our foundational work in a new targeted screening program's preimplementation phase will allow international comparisons to be made.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsSmoking CessationAustraliaFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID39243356
PMCPMC11847784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.