Research Priorities for Interventions to Address Health Disparities in Lung Nodule Management An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Lung nodules are common incidental findings, and timely evaluation is critical to ensure diagnosis of localizedstage and potentially curable lung cancers. Rates of guidelineconcordant lung nodule evaluation are low, and the risk of delayed evaluation is higher for minoritized groups. Objectives: To summarize the existing evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and prioritize research questions related to interventions to reduce disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee was convened to review the evidence and identify key knowledge gaps in four domains: 1) research methodology, 2) patient-level interventions, 3) clinicianlevel interventions, and 4) health system-level interventions. A modified Delphi approach was used to identify research priorities. Results: Key knowledge gaps included 1) a lack of standardized approaches to identify factors associated with lung nodule management disparities, 2) limited data evaluating the role of social determinants of health on disparities in lung nodule management, 3) a lack of certainty regarding the optimal strategy to improve patient-clinician communication and information transmission and/or retention, and 4) a paucity of information on the impact of patient navigators and culturally trainedmultidisciplinary teams. Conclusions: This statement outlines a research agenda intended to stimulate high-impact studies of interventions to mitigate disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Research questions were prioritized around the following domains: 1) need for methodologic guidelines for conducting research related to disparities in nodule management, 2) evaluating how social determinants of health influence lung nodule evaluation, 3) studying approaches to improve patient-clinician communication, and 4) evaluating the utility of patient navigators and culturally enriched multidisciplinary teams to reduce disparities.

Automated summary

This article summarizes the existing evidence on interventions to reduce disparities in lung nodule evaluation, identifies knowledge gaps, and prioritizes research questions. Key knowledge gaps include a lack of standardized approaches to identify factors associated with disparities in lung nodule evaluation, limited data on the influence of social determinants of health, uncertainty regarding optimal strategies to improve patient-clinician communication, and a lack of information on the impact of patient navigators and culturally trained multidisciplinary teams.