ArticleJTO clinical and research reports2025
The United States' Early Experience With Lung Cancer Screening-Creation of a National Data Linkage: A Brief Report.
Article in JTO clinical and research reports, 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.
- Variability Among Radiologists in Interpreting Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screens.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2026Article
- Article
- Compensation for Patients with Work-Related Lung Cancers: Value of Specialised Occupational Disease Consultations to Reduce Under-Recognition.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lung cancer screening has been recommended by the United States Preventive Services Taskforce since 2013. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services coverage decision in early 2015 required data submission to a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-approved registry for facilities to receive payment for screening. Only the American College of Radiology's Lung Cancer Screening Registry (LCSR) received approval for this purpose. Some LCSR elements, such as race, ethnicity, downstream diagnostic procedures, and cancer outcomes, were underreported. Methods: To address underreporting, we linked data from the LCSR to Medicare and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry data from 2015 to 2021. We created two different cohorts of individuals aged 65 years and older: (1) those who were enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service plans with parts A and B coverage at the time of at least one LCSR-reported screen, and (2) Medicare beneficiaries (regardless of whether fee-for-service or managed care) living within a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results catchment area at the time of at least one LCSR-reported screen. We compared the characteristics of individuals in the linked cohorts with those of all individuals in the LCSR aged 65 years and over. Results: Demographic, smoking history, and screening examination data elements in the linked data were generally similar to those in the overall LCSR. Conclusions: On the basis of these results, the linked populations seem to be generally representative of older individuals in the LCSR. These unique data linkages provide an unprecedented opportunity to better understand the early implementation of lung cancer screening in the United States.
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.