ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026
Reducing Stigma in Lung Cancer Screening: Co-Design of a Targeted Resource for Health Professionals in Australia.
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. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionOrganised lung cancer screening (LCS) programs are being developed worldwide in response to recent landmark trial evidence. Targeting high-risk individuals primarily based on smoking history, LCS faces challenges from smoking-related stigma, which can cause psychological harm and hinder participation. With limited interventions addressing this issue, this study aimed to co-design a communication-based strategy to reduce stigma in the LCS context.
methodsUsing best-practice co-design principles, this study involved workshops, focus groups, and interviews with 5 consumers (people eligible for LCS in Australia) and 44 health professionals and other experts (including clinicians, radiographers, behavioural scientists, and health managers). Participants were purposively sampled to achieve representation across key variables - e.g., smoking history for consumers, professional roles for experts. Consultation with experts was conducted as part of a larger project developing a suite of information materials for the National Lung Cancer Screening Program in Australia. Key literature and concurrent qualitative research with consumers (n = 24) also informed co-design. Qualitative data were analysed using abductive thematic analysis.
resultsEarly consultation identified the preferred format for the strategy as a resource targeted for health professionals involved in the LCS pathway. Resource content was iteratively revised, with three key themes developed: (1) Taking the onus off the individual; (2) Fostering understanding and empathy; (3) Positive framing. A lexicon guide promoting person-first and empowerment language was also included guided by previous literature. The final resource was a four-page A4 document for health professionals and LCS staff, designed to support effective, stigma-sensitive communication during LCS.
conclusionWe co-designed a practical, scalable resource to reduce stigma for use in the Australian National Lung Cancer Screening Program, expected to ultimately reduce psychological harm for LCS participants and enhance screening participation. Future research should evaluate the resource as an implementation strategy for LCS uptake. Cultural adaptation and tailoring of the resource for specific populations considering intersectional stigmas is also needed. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We collaborated with a consumer advisor for the project's duration, including study design, co-facilitation of consumer workshops, analysis and manuscript writing.
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.