ArticlePloS one2025
Self-blaming as a barrier to lung cancer screening and smoking cessation programs in Italy. A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer screening (LCS) combined with smoking cessation programs is a critical strategy for reducing lung cancer mortality. Understanding the perspectives of cigarette users and former ones on these interventions is essential for enhancing their acceptability and effectiveness. This study aimed to explore, in Italy, the perceptions and experiences of individuals eligible for LCS within the context of a smoking cessation program. METHODS AND
findingsThis multicenter qualitative study was conducted in two Italian regions as part of a larger project the Italian League against Cancer promoted. Using purposive sampling, we included (a) cigarette users and former ones who participated in an Italian trial, ITALUNG study, and (b) cigarette users who had been offered individual or group smoking cessation interventions and were theoretically eligible for screening in the following years (aged 50-70, ≥15 pack-years). Data were collected through open-ended semi-structured interviews and focus group meetings and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. The data analysis yielded six themes covering participants' views on the interactions between the two types of interventions (screening and smoking cessation program). Across their data, we generated the following themes: (i) depreciation and fatalism toward the risk of smoking, (ii) self-blaming and ethicality, (iii) ambivalent impact of the screening on smoking, (iv) LCS-related information and concerns, (v) teachable and motivating moments, and (vi) non-stigmatizing communication and testimony by professionals.
conclusionsOur study underscores the importance of avoiding stigma and respecting the dignity of cigarette users in implementing LCS and smoking cessation programs. Clear communication and supportive interactions with healthcare providers are crucial for enhancing the acceptability and effectiveness of these interventions. Future research should focus on quantifying these findings and exploring additional factors influencing the acceptability and effectiveness of combined LCS and smoking cessation programs.
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.