ReviewFrontiers in public health2026
From aspiration to reality: a cross-country analysis of the implementation of lung cancer screening in Europe.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 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.
- Barriers and facilitators to population-based lung cancer screening in Belgium: a qualitative stakeholder analysis in a pre-implementation context.BMC health services research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Implementation of lung cancer screening (LCS) has been slow across geographical Europe. Only three countries have a formal LCS program: Croatia, Poland, and England. Objective: This study aims to review the status of LCS and identify the barriers to implementation of formal programs. Methods: A framework to assess the status and identify key gaps was used, consisting of five dimensions: (1) policy prioritization and governance, (2) clinical review, (3) program design, (4) implementation, and (5) awareness. The research was conducted in 10 countries including Belgium, Croatia, England, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Sweden. Across countries, the assessment framework was applied to identify key barriers. The assessment was validated with local experts. Results: Countries are at different stages of implementation, with large variability in the proposed program design. The cross-country analysis found common barriers. A crucial driver of stimulating political commitment is a local network of well-connected clinicians and patients. Although governments request local data to support decision making, in many countries, local data collection is minimal or stalled. Implementation is the most underdeveloped dimension in the framework, commitment to sufficient funding and infrastructure for scaling up pilots and post screening care delivery is a common barrier. Finally, awareness amongst the public and healthcare professionals requires improvement. Conclusion: Progress depends on a number of factors namely, political will, funding commitment, a local network of well-connected experts, availability of local evidence, and feasibility assessments.
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.