ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2026
Participant views of case finding for COPD after lung cancer screening: the C FIND COPD 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly and accurate diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is essential to ensure correct management and minimise future morbidity. Therefore, case finding in symptomatic at-risk individuals is highly valuable. The C FIND COPD study invited symptomatic people at risk of COPD for a COPD case-finding diagnostic assessment. These individuals had undergone a previous lung cancer screening low-dose CT. The diagnostic assessment used a mobile research unit stationed in community car parks across Nottinghamshire. This current qualitative study aimed to gather participants' opinions about this research study and the associated lung assessment.
methods15 participants accepted an interview using a semi-structured interview guide by an independent researcher. At the visit, seven interviewees had been given a new diagnosis of COPD and eight had no current evidence of the condition. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed in NVivo (V.14) using inductive thematic analysis.
resultsAcross five themes, highlights included praise for the clinical research staff, the accessibility and atmosphere of the research unit, convenience of appointment and opportunity of case finding. Subsequent suboptimal communication with general practitioner surgeries was flagged as a key issue in the weeks following the assessment.
conclusionOverall, case finding of COPD after lung cancer screening as part of the C FIND COPD study was considered a valuable assessment and experience. Interviewees were grateful for the service and aside from some practical aspects, people supported a wider roll-out.
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.