Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41250020›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2025

Racial inequalities in eligibility and access to lung cancer screening: systematic review of United States studies.

Ya Yambao Yang, Courtney McNamara, David Stuckler

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Lung Cancer Screening Access and Cancer Stage at Diagnosis Among American Indian and White Patients.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026
    Observational
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ya Yambao YangDepartment of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California, 4610 X Street, Davis, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA. zajyang@ucdavis.edu.
Courtney McNamaraPopulation Health Sciences Institute, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, UK.
David StucklerDepartment of Social and Political Sciences and Dondena Research Centre on Population Dynamics, University of Bocconi, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn 2021, the United States Preventive Services Task Force introduced new guidelines aimed at reducing racial inequalities by lowering the smoking threshold and expanding age eligibility for screening. However, while some studies suggest these updates have increased eligibility and access, the impact of these changes on racial inequalities in lung cancer screening (LCS) eligibility and access has yet to be systematically reviewed. This study aims to synthesize existing evidence on racial disparities in LCS eligibility and access in the U.S. following the 2021 guideline reform.

methodsWe searched PubMed and Web of Science for studies using keywords related to race, lung cancer, and screening in the United States. The final search was conducted on July 25th, 2024. Articles were included if they quantified access or eligibility for one or more racial groups, enabling quantification of either absolute or relative inequality. Our final analytical sample included 26 articles.

resultsOf the 26 studies reviewed, 12 evaluated disparities in eligibility, and 17 assessed racial disparities in LCS access. All eligibility studies reported that Black Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans had lower eligibility rates compared to White Americans; estimated gaps between White and Black Americans ranged from 3.4 to 26.9% points and between 4.7 and 33.1 ppts between Whites and Hispanics. Gaps in access to LCS, conditional on eligibility, were narrower, ranging from 1.42 to 12.9 ppts. Higher disparities were observed on the U.S. East Coast compared to the West Coast.

conclusionDespite changes to guidelines aiming to ameliorate inequalities LCS, inequalities in both eligibility and access remain pronounced, especially for Black and Hispanic Americans. Further reforms are needed to adjust for lower eligibility among groups with higher levels of LCS need. Additionally, geographic differences, such as more pronounced disparities on the East Coast, suggest that regionally tailored approaches may support efforts to advance racial equity.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerEligibility DeterminationHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityLung NeoplasmsRacial GroupsHumansUnited StatesAccessEligibilityLung cancer screeningRacial inequality

Identifiers

PMID41250020
PMCPMC12625044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.