ArticleAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2026
Understanding lung cancer screening motivation: cognitive, affective, and thought-based predictors in a UK screening-eligible sample.
Article in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA nationwide targeted lung cancer screening program is underway in the United Kingdom, but uptake in recent trials remains modest, and little is known about the psychological processes that might influence uptake. PURPOSE: This study aimed to understand how individuals respond to a lung cancer screening invitation by identifying the key psychological, cognitive, and affective variables shaping screening intention and the thought processes underlying them.
methodsUK screening-eligible current and former smokers aged 55-74 years (N = 1106) read an online lung screening invitation before providing their unprompted thoughts and completing measures of cognitive and affective variables (attitude; descriptive, subjective, and moral norms; perceived behavioral control; fear; anticipated regret; and fatalism). Logistic regressions examined predictors of screening intention, with follow-up analyses linking thought content to significant cognitive and affective predictors.
resultsMoral and descriptive norms, perceived behavioral control, and inaction regret were positively associated with intention, while fear and anticipated regret associated with taking part and receiving abnormal results were negatively associated. Thoughts reflecting NHS program doubts, stigma, and cancer worry were consistently negatively associated with cognitive and affective predictors, whereas perceived screening benefits of early detection and peace of mind, and personal/family cancer history were positively associated.
conclusionScreening motivation was shaped by both cognitive and affective factors, underpinned by distinct thoughts. Findings suggest that health communication interventions may strengthen moral and descriptive norms, leverage inaction regret, and enhance self-efficacy by addressing feelings of stigma, embarrassment, and cancer worry to increase screening participation at this critical stage of national implementation.
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.