ArticleCHEST pulmonary2023
Veteran and Lung Cancer Screening Coordinator Perspectives on Improving Adherence to Lung Cancer Screening.
Article in CHEST pulmonary, 2023. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT scan has been shown to reduce mortality from lung cancer, the deadliest cancer killer. More than one-half of incident lung cancers detected in the National Lung Screening Trial were identified after the first year of screening, which highlights the importance of annual adherence to achieve mortality benefit from LCS. Although National Lung Screening Trial adherence across three rounds of screening was 95%, adherence in the community is lower and highly variable even within the same health system. Research Question: What are patient and LCS coordinator perspectives on barriers and potential solutions to ensuring adherence to annual LCS? Study Design and Methods: In this qualitative study, we conducted six veteran focus groups of 21 veterans who had undergone at least one LCS examination and individual interviews of eight LCS coordinators. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed and coded using qualitative content analysis. Codes were sorted into categories reflecting veteran perceptions, LCS ideas, observations, barriers, facilitators, preferences, recommendations, and LCS program issues. These codes were then analyzed and used to identify themes influencing adherence. Results: The following four themes were identified from qualitative analysis: (1) direct communication about the repeat annual nature of screening was a driver for patient adherence, (2) patients recommended using other modalities including text messaging and mobile applications to improve adherence, (3) LCS coordinators reported a lack of emphasis and focus on adherence because of a lack of resources, and (4) the variability in program practices for bringing patients back every year and inability to measure adherence are barriers that need to be addressed. Interpretation: Direct and multimodal communication may improve patient adherence to annual LCS, and system-level changes (eg, tracking dashboard and metrics) could assist LCS coordinators in addressing and focusing on LCS program adherence.
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.