ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Healthcare professionals' perspectives on decision-making about lung cancer screening participation: a cross-sectional study in Flanders.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with survival largely determined by the stage at diagnosis. While low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening reduces mortality, no population-based screening programme is currently implemented in Belgium, altough interest is increasing. However, its success will not only depend on participation but also on informed, well-considered choices, which are linked to better adherence and ethically sound practice. Shared decision-making (SDM) can play a central role in fostering such value-congruent participation, yet its implementation relies heavily on healthcare professionals (HCPs). Understanding how HCPs perceive their role, preparedness, and interprofessional responsibilities is crucial for developing ethically sound and feasible decision-making strategies for lung cancer screening.
methodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted among HCPs in Flanders involved in lung cancer prevention, detection, and care (N = 415). The questionnaire assessed perceptions of patient autonomy, professional guidance, and roles in supporting decision-making about potential population-based lung cancer screening. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, with group comparisons across gender, profession, and experience.
resultsParticipants represented general practitioners (49%), pharmacists (29%), tobacco treatment specialists (11%), and medical specialists (11%). Confidence in patients’ ability to make an informed participation decision was moderate (M = 6.08/10), while willingness to support patients was high (M = 7.93/10). More than 85% of participants preferred models in which the patient makes the final decision, either independently or after considering the HCP’s advice, suggesting broad support for patient autonomy alongside some reservations about patients’ ability to make an independent choice. Nevertheless, intentions to apply SDM-consistent decision support behaviours in response to invitees’ questions were generally high across professional groups. Familiarity with SDM, however, was moderate overall (M = 6.23/10) but varied significantly across professions and experience levels, with pharmacists and tobacco treatment specialists reporting lower knowledge.
conclusionsHCPs report only moderate confidence in patients’ decisional capability to make an autonomous decision about participation in lung cancer screening, yet they endorse patient involvement and express strong willingness to provide decision support. Strengthening decision-support tools, training, and interprofessional collaboration structures among HCPs will be vital to translate patient-centred decision-making into routine cancer screening practice. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.