ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2025
Interventions targeted to improve lung cancer screening uptake among high-risk individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 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.
- A Multilevel Approach to Improve Participation in Low-Dose CT for Lung Cancer Screening (Empower LCS): A Single-Arm Pilot Feasibility Clinical Trial.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2026Trial
- Pilot feasibility study to deliver low-dose CT lung cancer screening in Scotland: descriptive findings from the LungScot study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Lung cancer screening completion rates and neighborhood disadvantage among primary care patients in an integrated delivery network health system: a retrospective data analysis.BMC primary care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To synthesise evidence on interventions aimed at increasing lung cancer screening uptake among high-risk individuals, and examine the effectiveness of each intervention category. Methods: Eight databases, namely EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Wan Fang Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, were systematically searched from inception to June 2024. The reference lists of identified studies were manually searched. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and evaluated methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool. Meta-analyses and descriptive analyses were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for intervention category. All analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.4. Results: A total of 13 trials from 12 studies were included. Six categories of interventions were identified: online education, patient navigation, shared decision-making, outreach promotion, targeted invitation materials, and combined intervention. The meta-analysis findings revealed that lung cancer screening uptake was enhanced among high-risk individuals receiving various interventions (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.10-2.62; Conclusions: Combined intervention and patient navigation are most effective in increasing lung cancer screening uptake among high-risk individuals. However, the optimal design, tailoring, and delivery methods remain unclear due to the limited number of studies included and require further research.
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.