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
The SUMMIT Study: Utilising a written ‘Next Steps’ information booklet to prepare participants for potential lung cancer screening results and follow-up
  • Publication Type:
    Journal article
  • Authors:
    Bhamani A, Horst C, Bojang F, Quaife SL, Dickson JL, Tisi S, Hall H, Verghese P, Creamer A, Prendecki R, McCabe J, Gyertson K, Bowyer V, El-Emir E, Cotton A, Mehta S, Levermore C, Mullin A-M, Teague J, Farrelly L, Nair A, Devaraj A, Hackshaw A, Janes SM
  • Publisher:
    Elsevier BV
  • Publication date:
  • Pagination:
    75, 81
  • Journal:
    Lung Cancer
  • Volume:
  • Status:
  • Print ISSN:
  • Language:
  • Keywords:
    Lung Cancer Screening, Pulmonary Nodule, Result Communication, LDCT
  • Notes:
    © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Objectives: Low-Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer can result in several potential outcomes of varying significance. Communication methods used in Lung Cancer Screening (LCS) programmes must, therefore, ensure that participants are prepared for the range of possible results and follow-up. Here, we assess perceptions of a written preparatory information booklet provided to participants in a large LCS cohort designed to convey this information. Materials and Methods: All participants in the SUMMIT Study (NCT03934866) were provided with a results preparation information booklet, entitled ‘The SUMMIT Study: Next Steps’ at their baseline appointment which outlined potential results, their significance, and timelines for follow up. Results from the LDCT scan and Lung Health Check were subsequently sent by letter. Perceptions of this booklet were assessed among participants with indeterminate pulmonary findings when they attended a face-to-face appointment immediately before their three-month interval scan. Specifically, questions assessed the perceived usefulness of the booklet and the amount of information contained in it. Results: 70.1% (n = 1,412/2,014) participants remembered receiving the booklet at their appointment. Of these participants, 72.0% (n = 1,017/1,412) found it quite or very useful and 68.0% (n = 960/1,412) reported that it contained the right amount of information. Older participants, those from the least deprived socioeconomic quintile and those of Black ethnicity were less likely to report finding the booklet either quite or very useful, or that it contained the right amount of information. Participants who remembered receiving the booklet were more likely to be satisfied with the process of results communication by letter. Conclusion: Providing written information that prepares participants for possible LDCT results and their significance appears to be a useful resource and a helpful adjunct to a written method of results communication for large scale LCS programmes.
Publication data is maintained in RPS. Visit https://rps.ucl.ac.uk
 More search options
UCL Researchers Show More
Respiratory Medicine
Div of Medicine
Comprehensive CTU at UCL
CRUK Cancer Trials Centre
Respiratory Medicine
Respiratory Medicine
Behavioural Science and Health
University College London - Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Tel:+44 (0)20 7679 2000

© UCL 1999–2011

Search by