ArticleTobacco prevention & cessation2025
Increasing lung screening uptake: Exploring people who smoke and their family members' concerns and recommendations regarding screening invitations.
Article in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Attitudes to Lung Cancer Screening in England: An Inductive Content Analysis of Online Commentary Following Media Announcement of a National Lung Cancer Screening Programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChallenges with designing invitation materials and accessing high risk communities are all factors in encouraging attendance at lung screening. This study focused on ways to improve participation in those potentially eligible for lung screening.
methodsA total of 50 qualitative interviews and 4 focus groups (n=17) were undertaken with people aged 50-75 years from East Midlands, UK. Individuals were purposively sampled to include those who were potential lung screening participants (PSP: n=39) and family members (FM: n=11) of people who smoke, and therefore potentially eligible for participation. Semi-structured discussion guides explored views on lung screening and ways to support uptake. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the framework approach.
resultsData highlighted a number of novel findings. Themes centered on involving family members in encouraging lung screening attendance, appropriate phrasing around differing types of tobacco use and considering people who do not smoke within the context of lung screening eligibility.
conclusionsExploring the use of family members in encouraging attendance in lung screening may be a valuable, but as yet underused approach. Additional phrasing around varying types of tobacco use may help to clarify invitational materials. Clearer eligibility guidelines regarding lung screening may clarify the role of smoking in lung 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.