Level of Education Matters in Regard to Participants' Compliance With Screening in the National Lung Screening Trial.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Journal of Thoracic Imaging Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-08 DOI:10.1097/RTI.0000000000000741
Akeel A Alali
{"title":"Level of Education Matters in Regard to Participants' Compliance With Screening in the National Lung Screening Trial.","authors":"Akeel A Alali","doi":"10.1097/RTI.0000000000000741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The success of cancer screening depends on patient adherence to the screening program. The purpose of this study is to assess how the level of education might affect participants' compliance with screening in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Secondary data analyses of the participants in the NLST were performed. A total of 50,104 participants were included in this study. Participants who enrolled in the trial but refused the initial screening were compared with those who completed the screening. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to assess the association between participant noncompliance and education level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3712 (7.41%) participants refused lung cancer screening in the NLST. Compared with the reference group, participants with an education level of eighth grade or less (odds ratio [OR]: 2.1, CI: 1.68-2.76), ninth-11th grade (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.7-2.34), high school graduates (OR: 1.3, CI: 1.22-1.54), after high school training (OR: 1.1, CI: 1-1.31), or an associate's degree (OR: 1.2, CI: 1.07-1.36) had significantly higher odds of refusing lung cancer screening. Participants with a bachelor's degree showed no significant association with compliance with screening (OR: 0.9, P = 0.86). Multivariate regression analysis also showed that younger, single, male participants with a longer duration of smoking history had significantly higher odds of refusing the screening.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A lower level of education was significantly associated with refusing lung cancer screening. A strategic targeted approach for this group might be necessary to promote their compliance rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":49974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thoracic Imaging","volume":" ","pages":"W1-W4"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thoracic Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RTI.0000000000000741","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The success of cancer screening depends on patient adherence to the screening program. The purpose of this study is to assess how the level of education might affect participants' compliance with screening in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST).

Materials and methods: Secondary data analyses of the participants in the NLST were performed. A total of 50,104 participants were included in this study. Participants who enrolled in the trial but refused the initial screening were compared with those who completed the screening. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to assess the association between participant noncompliance and education level.

Results: A total of 3712 (7.41%) participants refused lung cancer screening in the NLST. Compared with the reference group, participants with an education level of eighth grade or less (odds ratio [OR]: 2.1, CI: 1.68-2.76), ninth-11th grade (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.7-2.34), high school graduates (OR: 1.3, CI: 1.22-1.54), after high school training (OR: 1.1, CI: 1-1.31), or an associate's degree (OR: 1.2, CI: 1.07-1.36) had significantly higher odds of refusing lung cancer screening. Participants with a bachelor's degree showed no significant association with compliance with screening (OR: 0.9, P = 0.86). Multivariate regression analysis also showed that younger, single, male participants with a longer duration of smoking history had significantly higher odds of refusing the screening.

Conclusion: A lower level of education was significantly associated with refusing lung cancer screening. A strategic targeted approach for this group might be necessary to promote their compliance rate.

在国家肺部筛查试验中,受试者的受教育程度与筛查依从性有关。
目的:癌症筛查的成功取决于患者对筛查计划的坚持。本研究的目的是评估教育水平如何影响国家肺部筛查试验(NLST)参与者对筛查的依从性。材料和方法:对NLST参与者进行二次数据分析。本研究共纳入50104名参与者。将参加试验但拒绝初次筛查的参与者与完成筛查的参与者进行比较。多元逻辑回归模型用于评估参与者不依从性与教育水平之间的关系。结果:共有3712名(7.41%)参与者拒绝接受NLST中的癌症筛查。与对照组相比,教育水平为八年级或八年级以下(比值比[or]:2.1,CI:1.68-2.76)、九年级至十一年级(比值比1.9,CI:1.7-2.34)、高中毕业生(比值比1.3,CI:1.22-1.54)、高中培训后(比值比1.1,CI:1-31.1)或副学士学位(比值比1.2,CI:1.07-1.36)的参与者拒绝肺癌癌症筛查的几率显著更高。具有学士学位的参与者与筛查的依从性没有显著关联(OR:0.9,P=0.86)。多元回归分析还显示,吸烟史较长的年轻、单身男性参与者拒绝筛查的几率显著较高。结论:文化程度低与拒绝癌症筛查有显著相关性。这一群体可能需要采取有针对性的战略方法来提高其合规率。
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
Journal of Thoracic Imaging
Journal of Thoracic Imaging 医学-核医学
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Thoracic Imaging (JTI) provides authoritative information on all aspects of the use of imaging techniques in the diagnosis of cardiac and pulmonary diseases. Original articles and analytical reviews published in this timely journal provide the very latest thinking of leading experts concerning the use of chest radiography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, ultrasound, and all other promising imaging techniques in cardiopulmonary radiology. Official Journal of the Society of Thoracic Radiology: Japanese Society of Thoracic Radiology Korean Society of Thoracic Radiology European Society of Thoracic Imaging.
×
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