Evidence Hub

LDCT uptake and determinants of lung cancer screening in Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yue Hu, Yun Zhao, Pei Dong, Wu-Qi Qiu, Ayan Mao

Frontiers in Public Health, 2026

1,716,756 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Importance Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening (LCS) has been shown to significantly reduce mortality rates. As its effectiveness relies on LDCT uptake, understanding uptake rates and their determinants can enhance the implementation and effectiveness of screening programs. Objective This study aimed to analyze LDCT uptake and its influencing factors in lung cancer screening within an Asian population. Methods Studies published between 1 January 2011 and 31 October 2025 were retrieved from four databases, and those reporting LDCT uptake and/or the factors influencing it were included. A random-effects model was applied to combine the effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore heterogeneity. Results A total of 35 studies involving 1,716,756 participants were analyzed, yielding a pooled LDCT uptake rate for lung cancer screening of 46% (95% confidence interval [CI], 41–51%). Program-level factors included sample scale, year of LDCT uptake, and program setting (p < 0.05). Patient-level factors that facilitated participation included a family history of lung cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.95; 95%CI, 1.45–2.63), harmful occupational exposure (OR, 1.48; 95%CI, 1.33–1.64), chronic respiratory diseases (OR, 1.97; 95%CI, 1.62–2.38), alcohol consumption (OR, 1.20; 95%CI, 1.06–1.36), passive smoking exposure (OR, 1.43; 95%CI, 1.24–1.64), a higher body mass index (BMI; OR, 1.12; 95%CI, 1.05–1.20), and higher education…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,716,756 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free