ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2026
Applying artificial intelligence to ensure high quality and equitable lung cancer screening.
Review in Translational lung cancer 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography has the potential to improve early detection and promote more equitable health outcomes. However, traditional eligibility criteria, based primarily on age and smoking history, may overlook high-risk individuals, particularly in underrepresented populations. These include racial minorities and individuals living in rural areas, who often face limited access to screening centers and high-quality imaging interpretations. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers promising solutions to potentially enhance the effectiveness and equity of LCS. First, AI could refine risk stratification by incorporating additional clinical data, social determinants of health, environmental exposures, and comorbidities, thereby identifying high-risk individuals who may be missed by conventional criteria (e.g., Black Americans, women). Second, AI could improve access to high-quality screening by enhancing image acquisition across diverse technologies and enabling remote interpretation through telehealth. Third, AI tools could support radiologists by increasing the accuracy of nodule detection and improving the assessment of malignancy risk in detected nodules. Finally, AI could assist in managing incidental findings and facilitate opportunistic screening, further expanding the impact of LCS. Despite its promise, the implementation of AI in clinical practice faces several barriers. These include regulatory hurdles, the need for clinical billing codes, and substantial investment in infrastructure, training and ongoing monitoring of these technologies. Further, the consideration of fairness-aware frameworks to mitigate racial bias in AI tools developed from non-representative datasets. Integrating AI into the radiologic workflow, with attention to these challenges, may address disparities and improve the overall quality and reach of LCS. However, AI implementation will need to be carefully evaluated to determine whether it is achieving these goals.
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.