↓ Skip to main content

Patient Perspectives on Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening, New Mexico, 2014

Overview of attention for article published in Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Patient Perspectives on Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening, New Mexico, 2014
Published in
Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy, August 2016
DOI 10.5888/pcd13.160093
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

National guidelines call for annual lung cancer screening for high-risk smokers using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). The objective of our study was to characterize patient knowledge and attitudes about lung cancer screening, smoking cessation, and shared decision making by patient and health care provider. We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with patients with histories of heavy smoking who received care at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC Clinic) and at a comprehensive cancer center-affiliated chest clinic (Chest Clinic) in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The interviews, conducted from February through September 2014, focused on perceptions about health screening, knowledge and attitudes about LDCT screening, and preferences regarding decision aids. We used a systematic iterative analytic process to identify preliminary and emergent themes and to create a coding structure. We reached thematic saturation after 22 interviews (10 at the FQHC Clinic, 12 at the Chest Clinic). Most patients were unaware of LDCT screening for lung cancer but were receptive to the test. Some smokers said they would consider quitting smoking if their screening result were positive. Concerns regarding screening were cost, radiation exposure, and transportation issues. To support decision making, most patients said they preferred one-on-one discussions with a provider. They also valued decision support tools (print materials, videos), but raised concerns about readability and Internet access. Implementing lung cancer screening in sociodemographically diverse populations poses significant challenges. The value of tobacco cessation counseling cannot be overemphasized. Effective interventions for shared decision making to undergo lung cancer screening will need the active engagement of health care providers and will require the use of accessible decision aids designed for people with low health literacy.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 21%
Researcher 22 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 32 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 23 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 17%
Psychology 13 10%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 42 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 August 2016.
All research outputs
#28,762,304
of 34,536,218 outputs
Outputs from Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy
#2,013
of 2,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,314
of 344,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy
#45
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,536,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.0. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.