An interventional study of LungTalk and Non-tailored lung screening in Lung Cancer, sponsored by Hackensack Meridian Health. Recruiting at 10 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 50 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-08.
Sponsored by Hackensack Meridian Health · Not applicable, Interventional, and Screening
This is a pilot Type 1 Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Trial. The study will first examine reach in a non-traditional setting (the Emergency Department - ED) that uses an Electronic Health Record (EHR)-embedded Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) screening tool to identify lung screening-eligible patients for a tailored intervention to increase lung screening uptake. Reach is defined as the absolute number, proportion, and representativeness of individuals targeted for lung screening knowledge, awareness, and uptake. Then, a pilot trial will be conducted to examine the preliminary effectiveness of a tailored lung screening intervention compared to enhanced usual care to influence individual-level potential drivers of lung screening (health literacy, mistrust, stigma, fatalism, knowledge, lung screening health beliefs) and the ability to increase lung screening uptake among screening-eligible patients. Quantitative (Randomized Controlled Trial and EHR data) methods will be used for data collection and analysis to address the study aims.
5,422 studies on the registry are indexed under Lung Neoplasms; 1,346 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 100 is above the median of 60 across 3,656 interventional studies indexed under Lung Neoplasms.
Browse Lung Neoplasms studies →Hackensack Meridian Health is the lead sponsor of 113 studies on the registry; 28 are open to participants now.
Of its 17 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 12 (71%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
LungTalk is a novel theoretically grounded health educational tool that will be delivered via iPad and is an interactive computer-based program that includes audio, video and animation segments with scripts presented from a master content library in consideration of different ways people like to learn. Informed by our prior research, LungTalk tailors its content based on smoking status and perceived barriers. In prior work, LungTalk more than doubled Lung Cancer Screening (LCS) knowledge and health beliefs (p \< 0.01), and was associated with a significant increase in deciding to screen for lung cancer compared to control group; OR 1.99; 95% CI, 1.03, 3.85, p = 0.03.
Behavioral: LungTalk
Non-tailored Lung Screening Pamphlet is a non-tailored educational brochure, What is Lung Cancer Screening from the GO2 Foundation that will be emailed to the patient. This widely used educational standard of care is a 2-page reader-friendly non-tailored electronic brochure about risk and screening for lung cancer used in clinical and community settings.
Other: Non-tailored lung screening
Tailored lung screening intervention
Non-tailored lung screening. It involves the addition of education to Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) screening and referral with patient navigation. Patients will be identified, and screened for SDOH needs using the UniteUs SDOH screener that is embedded in the Electronic Health Record (EHR), and connected to geographically-tailored resources (as described above under Arm 1). Participants will then be sent a non-tailored lung screening educational brochure via email to review that details lung cancer risk, lung screening facts, benefits, and potential harms. Within 48 hours, the Community Outreach and Engagement (COE) Patient Navigator will contact the patient to answer questions and provide navigation services as described above in Arm 1.
Lung Cancer Screening Uptake
Completion of a Screening Low-Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) of the Chest confirmed via Electronic Health Records (EHR))
Time frame: Assessed at 1 month and 6 months post intervention
Stage of Adoption for Lung Cancer Screening
Screening Intention will be assessed with the Stage of Adoption for Decision- Making About Lung Screening using an algorithm of questions used in our prior studies assessing the 7 stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance). This will allow investigators to assess intent.
Time frame: Assessed at 1 week and then at 1 month and 6 months post intervention
Health Literacy Scale
Change in Health Literacy Scale between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. The Health Literacy Scale will be measured using the 3-item psychometrically validated Health Literacy Scale by Chew and colleagues. This scale has been supported as valid for detecting inadequate health literacy using Likert scale response options ranging from 0=strongly disagree to 4 =strongly agree with lower scores representative of higher levels of health literacy.
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Medical Mistrust Scale
Change in Medical Mistrust Scale between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Medical Mistrust will be measured using the psychometrically validated 5-item Medical Mistrust Scale. This measure assesses constructs related to mistrust of the medical system, including suspicion, discrimination, and lack of support. Likert scale response options range from 1 to 4 with 1=Stongly Disagree to Agree 5=Strongly. Responses are summed (range 5-25), with higher scores indicating more trust. \*Negatively worded item is reverse coded. Reliability and validity have been well established with Cronbach's alpha of 0.87-0.88.
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Perceived Stigma Scale
Change in Perceived Stigma Scale between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Perceived Stigma will be measured using the 5-item smoking-related stigma subscale of the Cataldo Lung Cancer Stigma Scale. The response scale is 1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree; range is 5 to 25 (higher stigma). Cronbach's alphas were 0.75 to 0.89 in prior studies.
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Perceived Risk of Lung Cancer Scale
Change in Perceived Risk of Lung Cancer Scale between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales will be used to measure perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and self-efficacy. Content and construct validity have been established. Internal consistency reliability was established by our team with a sample of 497 lung cancer screening-eligible individuals with Perceived Risk of Lung Cancer on a 3-item scale with Likert-type responses from 1=Strongly Disagree to 4=Strongly Agree. The range of scores is 3 to 12 (higher perceived risk of lung cancer). Cronbach's alpha was 0.88 in our preliminary study.
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Perceived Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening Scale
Change in Perceived Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening Scale between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales will be used to measure perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and self-efficacy. Content and construct validity have been established. Internal consistency reliability was established by our team with a sample of 497 lung cancer screening-eligible individuals with Perceived Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening on a 6-item scale with responses ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 6 to 24 (higher perceived benefits), with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.76 in our preliminary study
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Scale
Change in Perceived Barriers of Lung Cancer Screening Scale between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales will be used to measure perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and self-efficacy. Content and construct validity have been established. Internal consistency reliability was established by our team with a sample of 497 lung cancer screening-eligible individuals with Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening. This scale has 17 items with four-point Likert responses where 1=strongly disagree and 4=strongly agree. The range of scores is 17 to 68 (higher perceived barriers) with a Cronbach's a of 0.87 in our preliminary psychometric study
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Self-Efficacy for Lung Cancer Screening Scale
Change in Self-Efficacy for Lung Cancer Screening Scale between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales will be used to measure perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and self-efficacy. Content and construct validity have been established. Internal consistency reliability was established by our team with a sample of 497 lung cancer screening-eligible individuals with Self-Efficacy for Lung Cancer Screening. This scale has nine items with a four-point Likert response option (1=Not at all Confident and 4 =Very Confident) to assess individual beliefs about ability to arrange and complete an LDCT to screen for lung cancer. The range of scores is 9 to 36 (higher levels of self-efficacy) with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.92 in our preliminary psychometric study.
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Knowledge: Lung Cancer and Screening Scale
Change in Knowledge: Lung Cancer and Lung Screening between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Knowledge of Lung Cancer and Lung Screening will be assessed with a 7-item multidimensional scale used in our preliminary studies adapted from literature specific to lung cancer. Several aspects will be assessed, including knowledge of lung cancer, risk, and screening. The range of scores is 0 to 7, with 0 being No Knowledge, and 9 being Complete Knowledge.
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Lung Cancer Fatalism
Change in Lung Cancer Fatalism between baseline and 1 week and 1-month post-intervention. Lung Cancer Fatalism will be measured with the 11-item dichotomous (0=yes and 1=no) Lung Cancer Fatalism Scale adapted from the Revised Powe Fatalism Inventory that has been psychometrically validated.
Time frame: At one week and one month post intervention
Plan to share: No
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.