ArticleThe Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Dismal adherence to lung cancer screening in a diverse urban population.
Article in The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patients with high distressed communities index score are at risk for "no-show" to lung cancer screening appointments.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Sociodemographic profile of individuals eligible for lung cancer screening according to Brazilian guidelines: a national analysis.Respiratory research & clinical practice · 2026Article
- Adherence to Annual Lung Cancer Screening and Rates of Cancer Diagnosis.JAMA network open · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesHigh-risk populations for lung cancer, including Black men and those with lower socioeconomic status, experience worse outcomes when treated. The mortality benefit of lung cancer screening cannot be realized without adherence to annual screening. Our study aims to understand annual adherence to lung cancer screening in a population traditionally experiencing health disparities, thus identifying lung cancer screening's impact on lung cancer disparities.
methodsA 10-year retrospective review of patients obtaining initial lung cancer screening (T
resultsA total of 6983 patients received lung cancer screening over 10 years. Only 8.13% adhered to T
conclusionsIn a safety-net institution with a diverse population traditionally experiencing disparities, adherence to annual lung cancer screening was low (8.13%) and declining each subsequent year, especially among male and Hispanic patients. Targeted education regarding importance of annual lung cancer screening is needed to realize the lifesaving potential of lung cancer screening.
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.