Observational studyJournal of the American College of Radiology : JACR2025
Radon and Tobacco Risk Counseling During Lung Cancer Screening Shared Decision-Making.
Observational study in Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveExamine frequency of tobacco and radon risk counseling during lung cancer screening shared decision making among qualified health care providers and the relationship between radon beliefs, tobacco and radon counseling self-efficacy, and related tobacco and radon risk counseling among providers.
methodsCross-sectional, observational study design employing a mailed self-report survey sent to a stratified random sample of 1,000 qualified health care providers in Kentucky. Regression analyses to examine the association among sociodemographic characteristics, radon beliefs, self-efficacy, familiarity with lung cancer screening guidelines, and tobacco or radon risk reduction counseling during lung cancer screening shared decision making.
resultsIn all, 149 providers responded to the mailed survey (14.9% participation rate). Participants were largely unsure about their radon beliefs. Providers rated their self-efficacy for tobacco cessation counseling higher than their self-efficacy related to counseling patients on radon testing and mitigation. Participants reported a high frequency of tobacco risk counseling during lung cancer screening shared decision making, but almost never counseled on radon risk. Adjusting for health care provider demographic- and practice-level variables, self-efficacy related to tobacco cessation counseling was the sole significant predictor of frequency of tobacco risk counseling. In the multilevel logistic regression model, no variables were found to be significantly associated with frequency of radon risk counseling during lung cancer screening shared decision making. DISCUSSION: Risk reduction remains essential to reducing the burden of lung cancer in the United States. Interventions that increase provider beliefs about radon and provider self-efficacy in relation to tobacco and radon counseling during lung cancer screening are needed.
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.