Institutional Research Information Service
UCL Logo
Please report any queries concerning the funding data grouped in the sections named "Externally Awarded" or "Internally Disbursed" (shown on the profile page) to your Research Finance Administrator. Your can find your Research Finance Administrator at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/finance/research/rs-contacts.php by entering your department
Please report any queries concerning the student data shown on the profile page to:

Email: portico-services@ucl.ac.uk

Help Desk: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ras/portico/helpdesk
Publication Detail
Acceptability of a standalone written leaflet for the National Health Service for England (NHSE) Targeted Lung Health Check Programme: A concurrent, think-aloud study.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal article
  • Publication Sub Type:
  • Authors:
    Jallow M, Black G, van Os S, Baldwin DR, Brain KE, Donnelly M, Janes SM, Kurtidu C, McCutchan G, Robb KA, Ruparel M, Quaife SL
  • Publisher:
    Blackwell Publishing
  • Publication date:
  • Journal:
    Health Expectations
  • Status:
    Published online
  • Country:
  • Print ISSN:
  • Language:
  • Keywords:
    Lung cancer screening, decision aid, decision-making, informed choice
BACKGROUND: Many countries are introducing low-dose computed tomography screening programmes for people at high risk of lung cancer. Effective communication strategies that convey risks and benefits, including unfamiliar concepts and outcome probabilities based on population risk are critical to achieving informed choice and mitigating inequalities in uptake. METHODS: This study investigated the acceptability of an aspect of NHS England's communication strategy in the form of a leaflet that was used to invite and inform eligible adults about the Targeted Lung Health Check (TLHC) programme. Acceptability was assessed in terms of how individuals engaged with, comprehended, and responded to the leaflet. Semi-structured, 'think aloud' interviews were conducted remotely with 40 UK screening-naïve current and former smokers (aged 55-73). The verbatim transcripts were analysed thematically using a coding framework based on the Dual Process Theory of cognition. RESULTS: The leaflet helped participants understand the principles and procedures of screening and fostered cautiously favourable intentions. Three themes captured the main results of the data analysis: (1) Response - participants experienced anxiety about screening results and further investigations, but the involvement of specialist healthcare professionals was reassuring; (2) Engagement - participants were rapidly drawn to information about lung cancer prevalence, and benefits of screening, but deliberated slowly about early diagnosis, risks of screening and less familiar symptoms of lung cancer; (3) Comprehension - participants understood the main principles of the TLHC programme, but some were confused by its rationale and eligibility criteria. Radiation risks, abnormal screening results and numerical probabilities of screening outcomes were hard to understand. CONCLUSION: The TLHC information leaflet appeared to be acceptable to the target population. There is scope to improve aspects of comprehension and engagement in ways that would support informed choice as a distributed process in lung cancer screening. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The insight and perspectives of patient representatives directly informed and improved the design and conduct of this study. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Publication data is maintained in RPS. Visit https://rps.ucl.ac.uk
 More search options
UCL Researchers
Respiratory Medicine
Behavioural Science and Health
Respiratory Medicine
University College London - Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Tel:+44 (0)20 7679 2000

© UCL 1999–2011

Search by