Public perspectives on ethical issues in lung cancer screening policy design and implementation in Ontario, Canada

Q3 Medicine
M. Pahwa , J. Abelson , L. Schwartz , P.A. Demers , K. Shen , H. Shaikh , M. Vanstone
{"title":"Public perspectives on ethical issues in lung cancer screening policy design and implementation in Ontario, Canada","authors":"M. Pahwa ,&nbsp;J. Abelson ,&nbsp;L. Schwartz ,&nbsp;P.A. Demers ,&nbsp;K. Shen ,&nbsp;H. Shaikh ,&nbsp;M. Vanstone","doi":"10.1016/j.jemep.2025.101061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Public perspectives on ethical issues in cancer screening may contribute to informing policymaking. Lung cancer screening is being implemented with the aim of reducing lung cancer mortality. Inequitable lung carcinogen exposure and lung cancer disparities are key ethical challenges in screening. This research aimed to examine public perspectives about ethical issues in lung cancer screening.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A qualitative description study was conducted in Ontario, Canada, where a provincial lung cancer screening program is being implemented. Using maximum variation sampling, Ontario residents aged 55–85 years were recruited via family medicine clinics, social media, and personal networks. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individual participants to elicit their perspectives on established ethical issues in cancer screening, with questions focused on potential lung cancer screening benefits and harms, who should be eligible, and why.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Twenty-six individuals participated in this study. Participants were aged 61−70 years and of various education levels. Sixty-five percent were women. No participants currently smoked commercial tobacco. Participants believed screening was important for reducing lung cancer mortality and saving healthcare costs. Participants stated that screening should consider and prioritize a wider range of lung cancer risk factors, such as occupational exposures and family history of lung cancer, than factors currently being used to offer screening to those at high risk. Participants gave less priority to screening for people who currently smoke.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Public perspectives supported screening high-risk candidates; however, support may be undermined by smoking stigma. Screening policies should more effectively mitigate stigma and ethically justify screening candidacy decisions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37707,"journal":{"name":"Ethics, Medicine and Public Health","volume":"33 ","pages":"Article 101061"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics, Medicine and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352552525000209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Public perspectives on ethical issues in cancer screening may contribute to informing policymaking. Lung cancer screening is being implemented with the aim of reducing lung cancer mortality. Inequitable lung carcinogen exposure and lung cancer disparities are key ethical challenges in screening. This research aimed to examine public perspectives about ethical issues in lung cancer screening.

Methods

A qualitative description study was conducted in Ontario, Canada, where a provincial lung cancer screening program is being implemented. Using maximum variation sampling, Ontario residents aged 55–85 years were recruited via family medicine clinics, social media, and personal networks. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individual participants to elicit their perspectives on established ethical issues in cancer screening, with questions focused on potential lung cancer screening benefits and harms, who should be eligible, and why.

Findings

Twenty-six individuals participated in this study. Participants were aged 61−70 years and of various education levels. Sixty-five percent were women. No participants currently smoked commercial tobacco. Participants believed screening was important for reducing lung cancer mortality and saving healthcare costs. Participants stated that screening should consider and prioritize a wider range of lung cancer risk factors, such as occupational exposures and family history of lung cancer, than factors currently being used to offer screening to those at high risk. Participants gave less priority to screening for people who currently smoke.

Conclusion

Public perspectives supported screening high-risk candidates; however, support may be undermined by smoking stigma. Screening policies should more effectively mitigate stigma and ethically justify screening candidacy decisions.
加拿大安大略省肺癌筛查政策设计和实施中伦理问题的公众观点
目的公众对癌症筛查中伦理问题的看法可能有助于为政策制定提供信息。正在实施肺癌筛查,目的是降低肺癌死亡率。不公平的肺癌暴露和肺癌差异是筛查中的关键伦理挑战。本研究旨在探讨公众对肺癌筛查中伦理问题的看法。方法在加拿大安大略省进行定性描述研究,该省正在实施一项省级肺癌筛查计划。采用最大变异抽样,通过家庭医学诊所、社交媒体和个人网络招募了55-85岁的安大略省居民。对个别参与者进行了半结构化访谈,以引出他们对癌症筛查中既定伦理问题的看法,问题集中在肺癌筛查的潜在益处和危害,谁应该符合条件,以及为什么。26个人参加了这项研究。参与者年龄在61 - 70岁之间,受教育程度不同。65%是女性。目前没有参与者吸食商业烟草。与会者认为,筛查对于降低肺癌死亡率和节省医疗费用很重要。与会者表示,筛查应考虑并优先考虑更广泛的肺癌风险因素,如职业暴露和肺癌家族史,而不是目前用于为高风险人群提供筛查的因素。参与者不太重视对目前吸烟的人进行筛查。结论公众观点支持筛选高危候选人;然而,吸烟的污名可能会削弱支持。筛选政策应更有效地减轻耻辱,并在道德上证明筛选候选人的决定是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ethics, Medicine and Public Health
Ethics, Medicine and Public Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
107
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: This review aims to compare approaches to medical ethics and bioethics in two forms, Anglo-Saxon (Ethics, Medicine and Public Health) and French (Ethique, Médecine et Politiques Publiques). Thus, in their native languages, the authors will present research on the legitimacy of the practice and appreciation of the consequences of acts towards patients as compared to the limits acceptable by the community, as illustrated by the democratic debate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信