Digital Interventions to Support Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) can reduce lung cancer mortality, but its adoption in the U.S. has been limited. Digital interventions have the potential to improve uptake of LCS. This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of digital interventions in promoting LCS. METHODS: A systematic search of three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Medline) was conducted to identify studies published between January 2014 and May 2023. Studies were reviewed and abstracted between February 2023 and July 2023. Outcomes related to knowledge, decision-making and screening were measured. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools. RESULTS: Of 1,979 screened articles, 30 studies were included in this review. Digital interventions evaluated included decision aids (n=20), electronic health record (EHR)-based interventions (n=7), social media campaigns and mobile applications (n=3). Decision aids were the most commonly studied digital interventions, with most studies showing improved knowledge (13/13) and reduced decisional conflict (7/9) but most did not show a substantial change in screening use. Fewer studies tested clinician-facing or multi-level interventions. DISCUSSION: Digital interventions, particularly decision aids, have shown promise in improving knowledge and the quality of decision-making around LCS. However, few interventions have been shown to substantially alter screening behavior and few clinician-facing or multi-level interventions have been rigorously tested. Further research is needed to develop effective tools for engaging patients in LCS, to compare the efficacy of different interventions, and evaluate implementation strategies in diverse healthcare settings.

Prevalence of self-reported cancer based on sexual orientation in the United States: a comparative analysis between lesbian, bisexual, gay, and heterosexual individuals.

PURPOSE: Our study aimed to compare the prevalence and likelihood of self-reported (SR) cancer diagnosis between lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) groups and the heterosexual population in the United States between 2017 and 2021. METHODS: This study analyzed data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 2017-2021, which included 134,372 heterosexual and 4576 LGB individuals aged 18 and above. The prevalence of any SR cancer and some selected cancers were calculated for the LGB and compared with heterosexual adults. Sexual orientation was used to predict SR cancer diagnosis for each sex using multiple logistic regression, adjusting for other sociodemographic determinants. RESULTS: The unadjusted prevalence of any SR cancer among the LGB population was 9.0%. Lesbian and Bisexual women had higher prevalence of SR cancer of the cervix, uterus, ovary, thyroid, bone, skin melanoma, leukemia, and other blood cancers than Heterosexual women. Gay and Bisexual men had a higher prevalence of SR cancer of the bladder, kidney, skin (non-melanoma, and other kinds), bone, lymphoma, and leukemia than Heterosexual men. After adjusting for other socio-demographic factors, gay men were 1.73 (CI 1.14-2.63, p = 0.01) times more likely than heterosexual men to be diagnosed with cancer, while lesbian women were 2.26 (CI 1.24-4.16, p = 0.009) times more likely to be diagnosed with cancer than heterosexual women. CONCLUSION: Some sexual minority subgroups are more likely to be diagnosed with cancer than their heterosexual counterparts. As a result, more research and SM-specific intervention efforts should focus on cancer risk assessment, screening, prevention, treatment, and survivorship in SM populations.