• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

肺癌筛查随机试验中的参与偏倚。

Participation bias in a randomised trial of screening for lung cancer.

机构信息

Department of General Practice, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, 24Q, 1014 Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

Lung Cancer. 2011 Sep;73(3):325-31. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.12.018. Epub 2011 Feb 15.

DOI:10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.12.018
PMID:21324544
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Participation bias might affect the results and the representability of randomised controlled trials. We investigated the degree of socio-demographic and psychosocial participation bias in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST).

METHODS

In DLCST the questionnaire COS-LC (Consequences of Screening in Lung Cancer) was used to measure the psychosocial aspects of screening. To investigate a difference with a comparable representative sample from the Danish population, we sent out an inclusion questionnaire to 3999 Danes in the age from 50 to 70 years randomly selected from the Central National Register. Those who completed the inclusion questionnaire and met the inclusion criteria from DLCST received the COS-LC. Those who completed the COS-LC-and thus formed a population sample comparable to DLCST - were compared to the DLCST participants on socio-demographics and psychosocial measures.

RESULTS

Participation rates were high among the comparable population sample: 75.3% completed the inclusion questionnaire and 77.4% of those who were eligible completed the COS-LC. The analyses revealed differences between the DLCST participants and the comparable population sample in the following socio-demographic aspects: social group, living alone, gender, age and geographical area. DLCST participants reported less negative psychosocial aspects than the comparable population sample.

CONCLUSION

The present study has shown substantial socio-demographic and psychosocial participation bias in DLCST.

摘要

简介

参与偏差可能会影响随机对照试验的结果和代表性。我们研究了丹麦肺癌筛查试验(DLCST)中社会人口学和心理社会参与偏差的程度。

方法

在 DLCST 中,使用问卷 COS-LC(肺癌筛查的后果)来测量筛查的心理社会方面。为了调查与丹麦人群中具有可比性的代表性样本之间的差异,我们从中央国家登记处随机选择了 50 至 70 岁的 3999 名丹麦人发送了一份纳入问卷。那些完成了纳入问卷并符合 DLCST 纳入标准的人收到了 COS-LC。那些完成了 COS-LC 并因此形成了与 DLCST 可比的人群样本的人,与 DLCST 参与者在社会人口统计学和心理社会措施方面进行了比较。

结果

可比人群样本的参与率很高:75.3%完成了纳入问卷,77.4%符合条件的人完成了 COS-LC。分析显示,DLCST 参与者与可比人群样本在以下社会人口学方面存在差异:社会群体、独居、性别、年龄和地理区域。DLCST 参与者报告的负面心理社会方面比可比人群样本少。

结论

本研究表明 DLCST 中存在大量社会人口学和心理社会参与偏差。

相似文献

1
Participation bias in a randomised trial of screening for lung cancer.肺癌筛查随机试验中的参与偏倚。
Lung Cancer. 2011 Sep;73(3):325-31. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.12.018. Epub 2011 Feb 15.
2
Psychosocial consequences in the Danish randomised controlled lung cancer screening trial (DLCST).丹麦肺癌随机对照筛查试验(DLCST)中的社会心理后果。
Lung Cancer. 2015 Jan;87(1):65-72. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.11.003. Epub 2014 Nov 20.
3
Direct and indirect healthcare costs of lung cancer CT screening in Denmark: a registry study.丹麦肺癌 CT 筛查的直接和间接医疗成本:一项注册研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Jan 21;10(1):e031768. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031768.
4
Psychosocial consequences of false positives in the Danish Lung Cancer CT Screening Trial: a nested matched cohort study.丹麦肺癌 CT 筛查试验中假阳性的心理社会后果:一项嵌套匹配队列研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Jun 4;10(6):e034682. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034682.
5
Contamination during 4 years of annual CT screening in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST).丹麦肺癌筛查试验(DLCST)中连续 4 年年度 CT 筛查期间的污染情况。
Lung Cancer. 2011 Mar;71(3):323-7. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.06.006.
6
Did psychosocial status, sociodemographics and smoking status affect non-attendance in control participants in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial? A nested observational study.丹麦肺癌筛查试验中,心理社会状况、社会人口统计学和吸烟状况是否会影响对照组参与者的失访?一项嵌套观察性研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 20;10(2):e030871. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030871.
7
The importance of socio-economic variables in cancer screening participation: a comparison between population-based and opportunistic screening in the EU-15.社会经济变量在癌症筛查参与中的重要性:欧盟 15 国基于人群和机会性筛查的比较。
Health Policy. 2011 Aug;101(3):269-76. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.02.001. Epub 2011 Mar 21.
8
Breast cancer risk assessment in a mammography screening program and participation in the IBIS-II chemoprevention trial.在乳腺 X 光筛查计划中进行乳腺癌风险评估以及参与 IBIS-II 化学预防试验。
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010 May;121(1):101-10. doi: 10.1007/s10549-010-0845-8. Epub 2010 Mar 21.
9
Psychosocial consequences of a three-month follow-up after receiving an abnormal lung cancer CT-screening result: A longitudinal survey.肺癌CT筛查结果异常后三个月随访的心理社会后果:一项纵向调查。
Lung Cancer. 2021 May;155:46-52. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2021.03.003. Epub 2021 Mar 10.
10
Validity of self-reported smoking status among participants in a lung cancer screening trial.肺癌筛查试验参与者自我报告吸烟状况的有效性。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 Oct;15(10):1825-8. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0393.

引用本文的文献

1
Sociodemographic factors associated with psychosocial consequences of false-positive colorectal cancer screening: a prospective cohort study.与结直肠癌假阳性筛查心理社会后果相关的社会人口学因素:一项前瞻性队列研究。
BMJ Open. 2025 May 16;15(5):e090967. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-090967.
2
Recent advancements in lung cancer research: a narrative review.肺癌研究的最新进展:一篇综述。
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2025 Mar 31;14(3):975-990. doi: 10.21037/tlcr-24-979. Epub 2025 Mar 27.
3
Co-designing a recruitment strategy for lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals: protocol for a mixed-methods study.
共同设计高危个体肺癌筛查的招募策略:一项混合方法研究的方案
HRB Open Res. 2023 Nov 13;6:64. doi: 10.12688/hrbopenres.13793.1. eCollection 2023.
4
Determinants of Willingness to Undergo Lung Cancer Screening among High-Risk Current and Ex-smokers in Sabah, Malaysia: A Cross-Sectional Pilot Study.马来西亚沙巴州高危现吸烟者和既往吸烟者中肺癌筛查意愿的决定因素:一项横断面试点研究
Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2023 Oct;86(4):284-293. doi: 10.4046/trd.2023.0051. Epub 2023 Aug 29.
5
Slipping through the cracks: Who is eligible but does not receive a healthcare provider recommendation for lung cancer screening?错失良机:有哪些符合条件但未获得医疗服务提供者推荐进行肺癌筛查的人群?
Lung Cancer. 2023 May;179:107185. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2023.107185. Epub 2023 Mar 31.
6
A Comprehensive Survey on the Progress, Process, and Challenges of Lung Cancer Detection and Classification.肺癌检测与分类的研究进展、方法及挑战综述
J Healthc Eng. 2022 Dec 16;2022:5905230. doi: 10.1155/2022/5905230. eCollection 2022.
7
Understanding patient barriers and facilitators to uptake of lung screening using low dose computed tomography: a mixed methods scoping review of the current literature.理解患者接受低剂量计算机断层扫描肺癌筛查的障碍和促进因素:对当前文献的混合方法范围综述。
Respir Res. 2022 Dec 23;23(1):374. doi: 10.1186/s12931-022-02255-8.
8
The impact of low-dose CT on smoking behavior among non-smokers, former-smokers, and smokers: A population-based screening cohort in rural China.低剂量 CT 对中国农村地区非吸烟者、曾经吸烟者和吸烟者吸烟行为的影响:一项基于人群的筛查队列研究。
Cancer Med. 2023 Feb;12(4):4667-4678. doi: 10.1002/cam4.5073. Epub 2022 Jul 27.
9
Generalizability and reach of a randomized controlled trial to improve oral health among home care recipients: comparing participants and nonparticipants at baseline and during follow-up.一项旨在改善家庭护理接受者口腔健康的随机对照试验的推广性和可及性:比较基线和随访期间的参与者和非参与者。
Trials. 2022 Jul 8;23(1):560. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06470-y.
10
Lung cancer and Covid-19: lessons learnt from the pandemic and where do we go from here?肺癌和新冠病毒肺炎:从大流行中吸取的教训,以及我们今后的方向?
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2022 May 30;32(1):19. doi: 10.1038/s41533-022-00283-x.