Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41869910›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026

Exploring Attitudes to Lung Cancer Screening in England: An Inductive Content Analysis of Online Commentary Following Media Announcement of a National Lung Cancer Screening Programme.

Alice Milne, Jodie Chalmers, Samantha L Quaife, Anna Bibby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Alice MilneAcademic Respiratory Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Jodie ChalmersAcademic Respiratory Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1460-3796
Samantha L QuaifeCentre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4918-6382
Anna BibbyAcademic Respiratory Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

Somerset, Wiltshire, Avon & Gloucestershire (SWAG) Cancer Alliance
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOn 26 June 2023, National Health Service (NHS) England announced plans for a national lung cancer screening programme, sparking significant online discussion and debate. Whilst screening has been shown to improve mortality in lung cancer, uptake is lower than desired. We hypothesised that online public responses to national news articles may provide an honest insight into public perceptions of lung cancer screening, particularly among those who may be underrepresented in research. The aim of this study was to explore online attitudes to lung cancer screening, identifying potential barriers and facilitators to screening participation.

methodsThis qualitative content analysis involved a targeted online search of the major UK news outlets, and their affiliate social media sites for articles published between 19 June 2023 and 26 July 2023. Seventeen relevant articles were included, and 921 comments were extracted. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse the data.

resultsA variety of attitudes and perspectives on the announcement of lung cancer screening were identified which were organised into four categories: Stigmatisation of smoking behaviour; Feasibility of NHS delivery; Eligibility and prioritisation; Scepticism and misinformation. Comments were often contextualised by personal health experiences, societal influences, and the politicisation of healthcare.

conclusionThis study identifies a barrier to lung cancer screening participation that has not been reported in previous work - concern regarding NHS capacity. It builds upon previously identified themes including screening misinformation, and scepticism. The prevalence and strength of smoking-related stigma, and the associated internalised shame expressed by people who smoke, may help explain the reduced uptake of lung screening seen in this group. The inclusion of voices not previously captured in screening uptake research builds on existing knowledge from prior qualitative work and provides a fuller picture of the personal and societal barriers to lung screening attendance. Interventions aiming to improve informed participation in screening need to consider both individual- and societal-level barriers to engagement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The data incorporated within this study are entirely derived from comments and opinions shared on social media and news outlet comment sections. Comments are anonymous, and hence sources cannot be traced, but commenters are likely to encompass eligible screening participants, relatives, and the general public. By utilising online comments, we aimed to capture voices not previously included in lung cancer screening uptake research, helping to identify novel perspectives on the screening programme.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthEarly Detection of CancerHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeLung NeoplasmsMass ScreeningEnglandHumansInternetMass MediaPublic OpinionQualitative ResearchSocial MediaState Medicineattitudesbarriersqualitative researchscreeningstigmatisation

Identifiers

PMID41869910
PMCPMC13045407

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.