Supplements

Shared decision-making may increase lung cancer screening participation with acceptable information quality and does not increase decisional conflict/regret.

This systematic review of 31 US-based studies found that shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening may increase participation (low certainty of evidence) and does not increase decisional conflict or regret (high certainty of evidence). The choice of SDM tool (e.g., decision aid vs. education tool) may not affect uptake, though a decision aid may be superior to an education tool.

Last updated: Aug 8, 2026•0 RCTs•1 Meta-analyses•📖 Read as article →

Evidence Score

Evidence Score49/100
Human RCT☆☆☆☆☆
Meta-analysis★★★☆☆
Mechanism★★★★★
Safety★★★★☆
Confidencelow

Study Evidence

Study 1. Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.

observational

Landsteiner A, Zerzan N, Ullman KE, Anthony M, Claussen AM, Bayer R, Do T, Gustavson AM, Melzer AC, Wilt TJ · CHEST pulmonary (2026)

Participants: N/A
Duration: Not specified (studies from 2010-2023)
Intervention: Shared decision-making (SDM) tools and strategies, including provider- and patient-facing materials, delivered via print, web, in-person, or video.
Outcome: Lung cancer screening participation, decisional conflict/regret, information quality, knowledge, uptake, adherence, and harms.
Effect Size: N/A (no quantitative analysis due to study variability)
Population: Eligible individuals for lung cancer screening in the US (studies included randomized controlled trials and observational studies).

Result:

PubMed: 42548364DOI: 10.1016/j.chpulm.2025.100222

Mechanism Graph

SDM involves counseling and shared decision-making between patient and provider.
↓
SDM tools provide information about benefits and harms of screening.
↓
This may increase patient knowledge and informed participation.
↓
Result: Increased screening participation without increasing decisional conflict/regret.

Limitations

  • ⚠High variability in study design, intervention, comparator, and methodology precluded quantitative analysis.
  • ⚠Few studies addressed uptake, adherence, and harms, and follow-up was short.
  • ⚠Little evidence on whether effects vary by patient or clinic characteristics.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does shared decision-making increase lung cancer screening participation?▼

The review found low certainty evidence that SDM may increase participation, but the effect is not definitive.

Does shared decision-making cause decisional conflict or regret?▼

No, the review found high certainty evidence that SDM does not increase decisional conflict or regret.

Which SDM tool is best for lung cancer screening?▼

The choice of tool may not affect uptake, but a decision aid may be superior to an education tool.

What are the limitations of the evidence on SDM for lung cancer screening?▼

The evidence is limited by study variability, short follow-up, and few studies addressing clinical outcomes like adherence and harms.

Products

Affiliate links coming soon. We only recommend products that match the doses and forms used in the cited research.

References

  1. 1.Landsteiner A, Zerzan N, Ullman KE, Anthony M, Claussen AM, Bayer R, Do T, Gustavson AM, Melzer AC, Wilt TJ. "Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.." CHEST pulmonary, 2026. PMID: 42548364 DOI: 10.1016/j.chpulm.2025.100222
Disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and is not medical advice. Evidence scores reflect the quality and quantity of available research, not clinical recommendations. Always consult a healthcare professional before starting any supplement or intervention.