Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42609114›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026

Development, Co-Design and Pilot Testing of Resources to Support Informed Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening in Australia: A Study Engaging Diverse Communities and Expert Healthcare Professionals.

Rachael H Dodd, Kathleen McFadden, Marianne Weber, Dana Mouwad, Mei Ling Yap, Michelle Dickson, Simone Sheriff, Emily Stone, Dipti Zachariah, Alicia King and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Rachael H DoddThe Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, and Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8080-6359
Kathleen McFaddenThe Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, and Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1546-8901
Marianne WeberCancer Elimination Collaboration, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5731-9651
Dana MouwadStatewide Health Literacy Hub, NSW Health, Sydney, Australia.
Mei Ling YapThe George Institute for Global Health, UNSW Sydney, Randwick, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4216-2895
Michelle DicksonThe Poche Centre for Indigenous Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0713-7803
Simone SheriffThe Poche Centre for Indigenous Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6864-8346
Emily StoneDepartment of Thoracic Medicine and Lung Transplantation, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9021-8449
Dipti ZachariahMulticultural Health, Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Alicia KingCancer Council Western Australia, Subiaco, WA, Australia.
Nicole M RankinEvaluation & Implementation Science Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-1405

Funding

Australasian Society for Behavioural Health and Medicine [Seed Funding Grant 2023]International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer [Young Investigator Grant 2021]
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAustralia's National Lung Cancer Screening (LCS) Program commenced in July 2025, targeting people at high risk of lung cancer based on age and smoking history. This study aimed to co-design evidence-based decision support tools to facilitate shared decision-making (SDM) for LCS in collaboration with intended end-users.

methodsCo-design workshops were conducted with consumers, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (4 workshops; n = 54), and clinicians/experts (2 workshops; n = 7). Participants were recruited through an independent social research company, an ongoing wellbeing support group, an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service and purposive sampling. Sessions involved structured activities to identify key content priorities and preferred formats for decision support tools. Workshop data were analysed concerning preferences regarding the key priorities for content and design of the tools. Cognitive interviews (n = 15) with an independent group of consumers were undertaken to test comprehensibility and refine design elements. Interviews were analysed against the key content areas that needed to be improved and the views of participants across the three tools developed. For each participant, their likes, dislikes, suggested changes, and how they compared across the three resources were documented. All resources were developed iteratively in alignment with International Patient Decision Aid Standards.

resultsKey shared priorities across consumers and clinicians included information about the screening process, what happens after the scan, benefits of screening, the need to manage cancer and smoking-related stigma and discrimination, tailoring for different language groups, and cultural safety. Consumers emphasised the need for visual representations of the screening pathway and testimonials from previous participants, while finding icon arrays confusing and overly statistical. Both groups highlighted the importance of supporting engagement with screening and reframing potential harms as 'other considerations' rather than deterrents. Feedback from cognitive interviews informed refinements to improve clarity and usability. The final suite of resources comprised a 16-page A5 booklet, a 2-page A4 leaflet, and a 3-min animated video.

conclusionThis co-design process produced three decision support tools to support informed choice within Australia's National LCS Program. The tools were found to be clear, acceptable, and adaptable, with potential for broader use in international LCS implementation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: An Aboriginal Reference Group of seven members was formed at project inception and provided cultural oversight and support in the design and conduct of the research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Members of the public who might be eligible or may have a family member eligible for lung cancer screening, were included in the conduct of the research.

Indexed as

Decision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesEarly Detection of CancerHealth PersonnelLung NeoplasmsAgedAustraliaAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PeoplesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot Projectsco‐designdecision toolsend‐userslung cancer screening

Identifiers

PMID42609114
PMCPMC13482345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.