Characteristics Associated With Early vs. Late Adoption of Lung Cancer Screening
2024
- 23Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage23
- Downloads15
- Abstract Views8
Article Description
Background: Although lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces lung cancer mortality among high-risk individuals, uptake overall remains low. With all cancer screening modalities, a period of diffusion among medical providers and the public is expected, with screening uptake exhibiting a distribution among early vs. late adoption. We aimed to characterize individuals undergoing LCS based upon the timeframe of screening adoption. Methods: This retrospective study examined patients who underwent LCS between January 2015 – December 2022 in a centralized LCS program. Based on United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for LCS, early and late adopters of LCS – defined by time from eligibility to screening completion – were compared. A multivariable regression model was constructed to identify factors associated with early adoption of LCS. Results: Among patients screened during the study period, 90.4% were eligible based on USPSTF 2013 criteria, and 9.6% were eligible based on USPSTF 2021 criteria. Of the USPSTF 2013 eligible persons, multivariable analysis demonstrated Black/African-American individuals and current smokers had significantly greater odds of early adoption (aOR 1.428 and 1.514, respectively). Those without a family history of lung cancer or without a personal history of cancer had significantly lower odds of early adoption of LCS. Conclusions: Early adopters were more likely to report Black/African-American race or current smoking status after adjustment for covariates. Future research should examine how screening diffuses across the overall LCS-eligible population, as well as identify factors that drive and inhibit diffusion to create programs and policies with the ultimate goal of increasing timely LCS uptake.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know