ArticleAnnals of the American Thoracic Society2026
Lung cancer screening care pathways in community settings: an examination of 3 healthcare systems.
Article in Annals of the American Thoracic Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond centralization: what community lung cancer screening workflows could reveal about the components that matter.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is recommended for individuals ages 50-80 with a high-risk tobacco history, but implementation of LCS in community settings remains a significant challenge. The benefits of LCS are tempered by both low uptake and low adherence to recommended follow-up, supporting the need for community-engaged research in this area.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to understand LCS workflows throughout the care continuum in representative community-care settings.
designThis is a case study informed by multi-method data collection to characterize 3 community-based LCS programs in Washington state that are participating in a hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial to enhance LCS program care coordination.
participantsThis research was conducted in collaboration with 3 community-based LCS referral programs. Participants included program partners who participated in formalized site visits and interviews. APPROACH: To develop and refine LCS workflows, we triangulated data from rapid ethnographic assessment site visits (n = 5), semi-structured interviews with care providers (n = 15), and member checking with key programmatic partners from each site. The rapid group analysis process was used to integrate findings and guide the development and visualization of LCS workflows. KEY
resultsThe 3 community-based programs provide LCS services for their regional primary care networks with various levels of centralized programmatic support. LCS workflows from each site demonstrate varied staff involvement and resources along the LCS care continuum. Provider interviews identified the need for patient education and outreach, provider support and resources, and attention to gaps in care along the LCS continuum.
conclusionThe LCS system-level workflows demonstrate 3 approaches to LCS care in community settings. LCS workflows can enable the timely identification of barriers and facilitators to improving LCS implementation in community settings.
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.