Saltar al contenido principal

ETHNOS_APP

Inicio • Búsqueda • Revistas • Lista 0

Reducing Stigma in Lung Cancer Screening

Co‐Design of a Targeted Resource for Health Professionals in Australia

Datos Bibliográficos

ID19507783
AutoresKathleen McFadden (0000-0003-1546-8901, Cancer Council NSW, autor de correspondencia), Nathan J Harrison (0000-0002-1011-8745, The University of Queensland), Shiho Rose (0000-0001-7651-5076, Cancer Council NSW), Giselle Hollinshead (Advocate Health Care), Nicole M Rankin (0000-0003-4836-0796, Melbourne Health), Nicole Rankin (0000-0002-0715-1405, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne Melbourne Australia), Marianne F Weber (0000-0001-5731-9651, The University of Sydney), Marianne Weber (The University of Sydney), Kate Dunlop (0000-0001-9544-9764, Cancer Council NSW), Dan Luo (0000-0002-0811-2854, Cancer Council NSW), Brooke Nickel (0000-0002-8100-4278, The University of Sydney), Nehmat Houssami (0000-0002-3641-952X, The University of Sydney), Rachael H Dodd (0000-0002-8080-6359, Cancer Council NSW)
Año2026
Volumen29
Número2
Páginase70571-e70571
Fecha de publicación2026-04-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaHealth Expectations (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625
EditorialWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/hex.70571
PMID42043285
OpenAlexW7156299623
IdiomaEN
Referencias citadas39

INTRODUCTION: Organised lung cancer screening (LCS) programs are being developed worldwide in response to recent landmark trial evidence. Targeting high-risk individuals primarily based on smoking history, LCS faces challenges from smoking-related stigma, which can cause psychological harm and hinder participation. With limited interventions addressing this issue, this study aimed to co-design a communication-based strategy to reduce stigma in the LCS context. METHODS: Using best-practice co-design principles, this study involved workshops, focus groups, and interviews with 5 consumers (people eligible for LCS in Australia) and 44 health professionals and other experts (including clinicians, radiographers, behavioural scientists, and health managers). Participants were purposively sampled to achieve representation across key variables - e.g., smoking history for consumers, professional roles for experts. Consultation with experts was conducted as part of a larger project developing a suite of information materials for the National Lung Cancer Screening Program in Australia. Key literature and concurrent qualitative research with consumers (n = 24) also informed co-design. Qualitative data were analysed using abductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Early consultation identified the preferred format for the strategy as a resource targeted for health professionals involved in the LCS pathway. Resource content was iteratively revised, with three key themes developed: (1) Taking the onus off the individual; (2) Fostering understanding and empathy; (3) Positive framing. A lexicon guide promoting person-first and empowerment language was also included guided by previous literature. The final resource was a four-page A4 document for health professionals and LCS staff, designed to support effective, stigma-sensitive communication during LCS. CONCLUSION: We co-designed a practical, scalable resource to reduce stigma for use in the Australian National Lung Cancer Screening Program, expected to ultimately reduce psychological harm for LCS participants and enhance screening participation. Future research should evaluate the resource as an implementation strategy for LCS uptake. Cultural adaptation and tailoring of the resource for specific populations considering intersectional stigmas is also needed. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We collaborated with a consumer advisor for the project's duration, including study design, co-facilitation of consumer workshops, analysis and manuscript writing

Empowerment · Focus group · Grey literature · Health professionals · Psychological intervention · Qualitative research · Resource (disambiguation) · Stigma (botany) · Thematic analysis · Delphi Technique in Research · Global Cancer Incidence and Screening · Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

  • Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening

    The National Lung Screening Trial Research Team•New England Journal of Medicine•2011

  • The Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework

    Open Access•Anne Stangl, Valerie A Earnshaw et al.•BMC Medicine•2019

  • Co-creation, co-design, co-production for public health – a perspective on definitions and distinctions

    Open Access•Carmen Vargas, Jill Whelan et al.•Public Health Research & Practice•2022

  • Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI) Statement

    Open Access•Hilary Pinnock, Melanie Barwick et al.•BMJ•2017

  • Using Implementation Science to Disseminate a Lung Cancer Screening Education Intervention Through Community Health Workers

    Open Access•Lovoria B Williams, Brent J Shelton et al.•Journal of Community Health•2021

  • A Guide to Abductive Thematic Analysis

    Open Access•Jamie Thompson•Qualitative Report•2022

  • Racism, discrimination, medical mistrust, stigma, and lung cancer screening

    Sreekar Miriyala, Kirsten V Nguyen et al.•Ethnicity and Health•2025

  • Theory Construction in Qualitative Research

    Open Access•Stefan Timmerman, Iddo Tavory•Sociological Theory•2012

Velocidad de citaciónhistorical
Altamente citadoNo
Ethnos_APP • Proyecto Open Source • Licencia MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidad y Cookies • Documentación de la API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código de la API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código del Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae