ArticleClinical lung cancer2025
Assessing Factors Associated With Patient-Provider Discussions About Lung Cancer Screening Using Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Utilization.
Article in Clinical lung cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient-provider shared decision-making discussions are an important component of lung cancer screening guidelines, but little is known about factors associated with these discussions among screening-eligible patients. We used Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Utilization to examine factors associated with discussing LCS with a provider. PATIENTS: Data came from an online survey of N = 516 U.S. adults meeting United States Preventive Services Task Force LCS eligibility criteria (ie, were 50-80 years of age and had at least a 20-pack year history of tobacco use).
methodsWe used logistic regression to investigate whether having a LCS discussion was associated with predisposing factors (eg, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] diagnosis), enabling factors (eg, having a primary care provider [PCP]), and need factors (eg, smoking history).
resultsAbout 36% participants had ever discussed LCS with a provider. Participants diagnosed with COPD (OR = 3.56, 95% CI, 1.90-6.67) and who had a first-degree relative with lung cancer (OR = 1.78, 95% CI, 1.02-3.09) had higher odds of LCS discussion than those without COPD and with no family history, respectively. Women had lower odds of LCS discussion than men (OR = 0.37, 95% CI, 0.24-0.58). Participants with an income of $30,000 to $59,999 had higher odds of LCS discussion compared to those earning < $30,000 (OR = 1.78, 95% CI, 1.06-2.98). Not having a PCP (OR = 0.39, 95% CI, 0.21-0.72) and currently smoking (OR = 0.38, 95% CI, 0.18-0.79) were associated with lower odds of LCS discussion.
conclusionsFuture interventions are needed to ensure all LCS-eligible individuals have access to provider discussions about LCS.
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.