SynthesisBMC public health2025
Facilitators and barriers of lung cancer screening participation: umbrella and systematic review of the global evidence.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Development and validation of an online nomogram to predict breast cancer screening participation among high-risk women: A cross-sectional study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Factors influencing participation in lung cancer screening among screening-eligible adults: a scoping review.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Review
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Lung Cancer Screening and Diagnosis: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Strategies for sustainable lung cancer screening: a multi-faceted perspective to long-term surveillance in SOLACE.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Awareness of lung cancer screening among smokers: a Lebanese experience.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
introductionLung cancer is the leading cancer worldwide, accounting for 2.5 million new cases and 1.8 million deaths in 2022. Early identification of lung cancer through low-dose computed tomography screening is associated with improved outcomes. However, in areas where lung cancer screening (LCS) is currently offered, participation is generally low. LCS is expanding worldwide and is a rapidly evolving field. This comprehensive review aimed to synthesise existing literature on factors associated with LCS participation.
methodsPubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched for peer-reviewed articles. Systematic reviews published before 2021 were reviewed and synthesised, while a top-up systematic review of original research published from 2021 onward was conducted. Data on facilitators and barriers of LCS were extracted and analysed using the socio-ecological model and synthesised as an umbrella review of review articles and a systematic review of original research papers. Study quality was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools.
resultsOver 110 million participants (N = 110,999,150) were included in seven reviews and 54 recent articles. Facilitators of LCS participation were at the organisational level (promotion of the program, trained staff, integration of LCS with other services, and supportive technology), healthcare provider level (information provision, clear screening recommendations, and positive patient relationships), and individual-level (experience with health services and awareness of cancer). Barriers were at the organisational level (reduced access, limited health insurance and inadequate workforce, communication, information resources, and technology to support the program), healthcare provider level (limited LCS skills and/or knowledge and training, sub-optimal referral processes, and insufficient awareness of health insurance coverage for screening costs ), and individual-level (low awareness of LCS and its cost coverage by health insurance, fear of being diagnosed with cancer, time constraints).
conclusionsGovernments and healthcare services providing LCS programs may maximise facilitators and address barriers to LCS participation by working collaboratively with other stakeholders (e.g., health insurance companies, technology specialists, researchers). A focus on upstream factors (organisation and healthcare provider levels) that drive systemic inequalities in LCS participation may have the most public health benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.