ArticleJTCVS open2026
Willingness to receive lung cancer screening when engaged in community-based locations.
Article in JTCVS open, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening enables early detection and reduces lung cancer mortality. Yet, less than 10% of eligible individuals participate in LDCT. This study leveraged community connections to measure willingness to undergo lung cancer screening among a diverse population. Methods: Black (n = 437) and White (n = 122) Americans were recruited from community-based locations (eg, barbershops, salons, libraries) in a large city. Participants completed a survey measuring willingness to undergo lung cancer screening if recommended (1 = not at all likely, 10 = very likely). They also answered questions about individual-, provider-, and structural-level screening barriers: medical mistrust (trust in health care system to deliver accurate screening results; 1 = very little trust, 10 = significant level of trust), perceived provider recommendations (how well primary care doctors promote screening in their community; 1 = very poorly, 10 = extremely), and financial accessibility (likelihood of insurance coverage of screening; 1 = very unlikely, 10 = very likely). Results: Mean age was 38.59 years; 53.6% were female. Screening willingness did not differ by race (Black American: 7.27 ± 3.04 vs White American: 7.21 ± 2.86). Black Americans perceived greater insurance coverage for screening (6.97 ± 3.01 vs 6.43 ± 2.84; Conclusions: Screening willingness is shaped by financial accessibility, provider recommendations, and trust among both Black and White Americans. Mistrust emerged as a prominent barrier for Black Americans, whereas concerns about insurance coverage were a barrier among White Americans. Efforts to increase screening uptake should use a multilevel approach, with attention to needs across racial groups. The successful recruitment of participants from community-based locations indicates that residents are receptive to information about lung cancer screening outside clinical settings, highlighting opportunities to expand screening education and efforts to these locations to reach diverse populations.
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.