ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2026
Supporting nurses to improve clinical trial discussions with patients with lung cancer using the Lung I-ACT tool: a mixed methods pilot study.
Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmpowering nurses to discuss clinical trials with patients can increase recruitment rates. Clinical trials are essential for improving lung cancer patient outcomes; in the short term, they provide individuals access to new treatments and care regimens which, longer term, have the potential to advance clinical care. However, recruitment into lung cancer clinical trials is as low as 5%, and lung cancer nurses feel ill-equipped to signpost clinical trial opportunities to patients. This study aimed to pilot and assess the acceptability and utility of the 'Lung I-ACT tool': a newly developed resource comprising a patient-facing leaflet and a nurse-facing poster, designed to help lung cancer nurses initiate clinical trial discussions with patients.
methodsA 6-month, mixed methods, pilot study was conducted at seven NHS hospital sites in the UK; four were intervention sites, three were control sites. Data on self-efficacy, knowledge, confidence, awareness and current practice were collected using online surveys for nurses at baseline, 3 and 6 months, and online interviews with lung cancer nurses and patients from intervention sites. Survey data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, and interview data were thematically analysed via Framework Method.
resultsThirty-four nurse respondents were recruited to the survey. Survey findings indicated increased frequency of clinical trial discussions at the intervention sites, and increased nurse awareness, confidence and knowledge to navigate these discussions. Eleven nurses and four patients were interviewed; these data comprised five themes regarding lung cancer nurses' and patients' views of the Lung I-ACT tool: (1) content and format of the tool, (2) application and utility of the tool in practice, (3) perceived changes to practice, (4) knowledge, awareness and confidence to discuss clinical trials, (5) contextual and situational factors impacting the presentation of clinical trials.
conclusionThe Lung I-ACT tool improves nurses' confidence in discussing trials with patients through increasing their awareness of clinical trial opportunities and helping them to structure conversations.
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.