2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106503
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining lung cancer screening utilization with public-use data: Opportunities and challenges

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We could not directly ascertain whether a given individual was willing and able to undergo lung surgery; this is a limitation of all publicly available data sets 60 and, indeed, routine health data, as clinicians have no recommended tool to systematically assess health status prior to ordering LCS.…”
Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We could not directly ascertain whether a given individual was willing and able to undergo lung surgery; this is a limitation of all publicly available data sets 60 and, indeed, routine health data, as clinicians have no recommended tool to systematically assess health status prior to ordering LCS.…”
Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent review article has suggested that it may be helpful to revise the wording of the BRFSS lung cancer screening question or add additional items to improve the accuracy of surveillance of lung cancer screening. 40 Future validation studies on the BRFSS lung screening module items as well as additional questions to improve the accuracy of surveillance of lung cancer screening are needed. With the recently expanded screening criteria, it will be imperative to ensure those newly eligible individuals are informed of their option to get screened, particularly once insurance coverage becomes available.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is possible the current BRFSS lung cancer screening question wording measures something different from low dose CT scans reported to the American College of Radiology Lung Cancer Screening Registry, because the BRFSS lung cancer screening rates appears higher than what is reported by radiology facilities to the American College of Radiology. A recent review article has suggested that it may be helpful to revise the wording of the BRFSS lung cancer screening question or add additional items to improve the accuracy of surveillance of lung cancer screening 40 . Future validation studies on the BRFSS lung screening module items as well as additional questions to improve the accuracy of surveillance of lung cancer screening are needed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are several characteristics of place, including access to and quality of care (particularly lung cancer screening), that may contribute to these findings. As mentioned by Gupta et al, 2 overall lung cancer screening utilization is low, with <15% of eligible individuals screened each year 5 . Lower SES areas have a higher proportion of individuals eligible for lung cancer screening and a higher lung cancer incidence rate 6 .…”
Section: What Is Nextmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As mentioned by Gupta et al, 2 overall lung cancer screening utilization is low, with <15% of eligible individuals screened each year. 5 Lower SES areas have a higher proportion of individuals eligible for lung cancer screening and a higher lung cancer incidence rate. 6 However, accredited lung cancer screening programs are not evenly distributed around the country: They are concentrated in northern, eastern, and urban areas and have limited overlap with areas with high lung cancer incidence and mortality.…”
Section: What Is Nextmentioning
confidence: 99%