Literature DB >> 19282345

Informed participation in a randomised controlled trial of computed tomography screening for lung cancer.

K A M van den Bergh1, M L Essink-Bot, R J van Klaveren, H J de Koning.   

Abstract

The actual lung cancer (screening) knowledge, attitudes, risk perceptions, reasons to participate in or decline participation, and informed decisions of subjects who decided to or decided not to participate in the Dutch-Belgian randomised controlled trial for lung cancer screening in high-risk subjects (the NELSON trial) were evaluated. A total of 2,500 high-risk subjects were asked to complete a questionnaire 3 weeks after they had received a brochure with information about the trial. Differences in knowledge, attitude and risk perception between participants and nonparticipants were analysed with logistic regression analyses adjusted for sex and smoking status. The questionnaire response of trial participants was 80% (n = 889) whereas the response of nonparticipants was low (7%, n = 97) and selective. Participants' responses to knowledge items on lung cancer as a disease were on average more often correct (mean+/-sd 68+/-17%) than items on lung cancer screening (49+/-29%). Participants had adequate knowledge on lung cancer screening (51%) more often than the nonparticipants (38%; p = 0.009). Of the decisions regarding participation, 49% were uninformed, mainly due to insufficient knowledge. Most of the participants (99%) and 64% of the nonparticipants had a positive attitude towards lung cancer screening. Additional efforts are required to improve the knowledge and understanding of subjects who are in the process of decision-making regarding participation in a lung cancer screening trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19282345     DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00098908

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Respir J        ISSN: 0903-1936            Impact factor:   16.671


  22 in total

1.  Assessing knowledge and attitudes towards screening among users of Faecal Immunochemical Test (FIT).

Authors:  Maaike J Denters; Marije Deutekom; Marie-Louise Essink-Bot; Patrick M Bossuyt; Paul Fockens; Evelien Dekker
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Perceptions of lung cancer risk and beliefs in screening accuracy of spiral computed tomography among high-risk lung cancer family members.

Authors:  Pamela S Sinicrope; Kari G Rabe; Tabetha A Brockman; Christi A Patten; Wesley O Petersen; Joshua Slusser; Ping Yang; Stephen J Swensen; Eric S Edell; Mariza de Andrade; Gloria M Petersen
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Distress and patient-centered communication among veterans with incidental (not screen-detected) pulmonary nodules. A cohort study.

Authors:  Christopher G Slatore; Sara E Golden; Linda Ganzini; Renda Soylemez Wiener; David H Au
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2015-02

4.  Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for lung cancer in the United States.

Authors:  Pamela M McMahon; Chung Yin Kong; Colleen Bouzan; Milton C Weinstein; Lauren E Cipriano; Angela C Tramontano; Bruce E Johnson; Jane C Weeks; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 15.609

5.  The perspectives of survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma on lung cancer screening: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Rachel Broadbent; Louise Gorman; Christopher J Armitage; John Radford; Kim Linton
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Overwhelming support among urban Irish COPD patients for lung cancer screening by low-dose CT scan.

Authors:  M Pallin; S Walsh; M F O'Driscoll; C Murray; A Cahalane; L Brown; M Carter; P Mitchell; T J McDonnell; M W Butler
Journal:  Lung       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 2.584

7.  Development of a fragile X syndrome (FXS) knowledge scale: towards a modified multidimensional measure of informed choice for FXS population carrier screening.

Authors:  Alice G Ames; Alice Jaques; Obioha C Ukoumunne; Alison D Archibald; Rony E Duncan; Jon Emery; Sylvia A Metcalfe
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Study protocol: population screening for colorectal cancer by colonoscopy or CT colonography: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Thomas R de Wijkerslooth; Margriet C de Haan; Esther M Stoop; Marije Deutekom; Paul Fockens; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Maarten Thomeer; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Marie-Louise Essink-Bot; Monique E van Leerdam; Ernst J Kuipers; Evelien Dekker; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 9.  Patient-centered outcomes among lung cancer screening recipients with computed tomography: a systematic review.

Authors:  Christopher G Slatore; Donald R Sullivan; Miranda Pappas; Linda L Humphrey
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 20.121

10.  Barriers to uptake among high-risk individuals declining participation in lung cancer screening: a mixed methods analysis of the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial.

Authors:  Noor Ali; Kate J Lifford; Ben Carter; Fiona McRonald; Ghasem Yadegarfar; David R Baldwin; David Weller; David M Hansell; Stephen W Duffy; John K Field; Kate Brain
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.