The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Screening by Chest Radiograph and Lung Cancer Mortality: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Randomized Trial
Abstract
CONTEXT: The effect on mortality of screening for lung cancer with modern chest radiographs is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect on mortality of screening for lung cancer using radiographs in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trial that involved 154,901 participants aged 55 through 74 years, 77,445 of whom were assigned to annual screenings and 77,456 to usual care at 1 of 10 screening centers across the United States between November 1993 and July 2001. The data from a subset of eligible participants for the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), which compared chest radiograph with spiral computed tomographic (CT) screening, were analyzed. INTERVENTION: Participants in the intervention group were offered annual posteroanterior view chest radiograph for 4 years. Diagnostic follow-up of positive screening results was determined by participants and their health care practitioners. Participants in the usual care group were offered no interventions and received their usual medical care. All diagnosed cancers, deaths, and causes of death were ascertained through the earlier of 13 years of follow-up or until December 31, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality from lung cancer. Secondary outcomes included lung cancer incidence, complications associated with diagnostic procedures, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Screening adherence was 86.6% at baseline and 79% to 84% at years 1 through 3; the rate of screening use in the usual care group was 11%. Cumulative lung cancer incidence rates through 13 years of follow-up were 20.1 per 10,000 person-years in the intervention group and 19.2 per 10,000 person-years in the usual care group (rate ratio [RR]; 1.05, 95% CI, 0.98-1.12). A total of 1213 lung cancer deaths were observed in the intervention group compared with 1230 in usual care group through 13 years (mortality RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87-1.22). Stage and histology were similar between the 2 groups. The RR of mortality for the subset of participants eligible for the NLST, over the same 6-year follow-up period, was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.81-1.10). CONCLUSION: Annual screening with chest radiograph did not reduce lung cancer mortality compared with usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00002540.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening
The National Lung Screening Trial Research Team (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1102873 · Cited by 11,064
Cited by
Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
US Preventive Services Task Force, Krist, A. H., Davidson, K. W., Mangione, C. M., Barry, M. J., Cabana, M., Caughey, A. B., Davis, E. M., Donahue, K. E., Doubeni, C. A., et al. (2021) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2021.1117 · Cited by 1,816
Domain adaptation for medical image analysis: A survey
Guan, H., & Liu, M. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2021.3117407 · Cited by 1,057
Jacobs, I. J., Menon, U., Ryan, A., Gentry-Maharaj, A., Burnell, M., Kalsi, J. K., Amso, N. N., Apostolidou, S., Benjamin, E., Cruickshank, D., et al. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)01224-6 · Cited by 1,048
European position statement on lung cancer screening
Oudkerk, M., Devaraj, A., Vliegenthart, R., Henzler, T., Prosch, H., Heussel, C. P., Bastarrika, G., Sverzellati, N., Mascalchi, M., Delorme, S., et al. (2017) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30861-6 · Cited by 587
A Comparative Performance Analysis of Data Resampling Methods on Imbalance Medical Data
Khushi, M., Shaukat, K., Alam, T. M., Hameed, I. A., Uddin, S., Luo, S., Yang, X., & Reyes, M. C. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3102399 · Cited by 335
Metadata
- Authors
- Oken, M. M., Hocking, W. G., Kvale, P. A., Andriole, G. L., Buys, S. S., Church, T. R., Crawford, E. D., Fouad, M. N., Isaacs, C., Reding, D. J., Weissfeld, J. L., Yokochi, L. A., O’Brien, B., Ragard, L. R., Rathmell, J. M., Riley, T. L., Wright, P., Caparaso, N., Hu, P., Izmirlian, G., Pinsky, P. F., Prorok, P. C., Kramer, B. S., Miller, A. B., Gohagan, J. K., Berg, C. D., & PLCO Project Team, F. T.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2011-11-02
- Volume
- 306
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 1865
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2018404797
- Cited by
- 655
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 45.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Screening by Chest Radiograph and Lung Cancer Mortality: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Randomized Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2011.1591
- The paper
- Oken, M. M., Hocking, W. G., Kvale, P. A., Andriole, G. L., Buys, S. S., Church, T. R., Crawford, E. D., Fouad, M. N., Isaacs, C., Reding, D. J., Weissfeld, J. L., Yokochi, L. A., O’Brien, B., Ragard, L. R., Rathmell, J. M., Riley, T. L., Wright, P., Caparaso, N., Hu, P., . . . PLCO Project Team, F. T. (2011). Screening by Chest Radiograph and Lung Cancer Mortality: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Randomized Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.1591
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.